Legacy const, attempt 2 (Re: Legacy const)

gaz Heyes gazheyes at gmail.com
Thu Apr 19 05:51:26 PDT 2012


On 18 April 2012 19:13, Geoffrey Sneddon <gsneddon at opera.com> wrote:

> I've just had it pointed out to me that my original email made little
> sense, so let's try again:
>
> const has historically been needed in non-strict/strict code for web
> compatibility on non-IE code (typically either down to server-side UA
> sniffing or just explicitly non-support of IE). IE still doesn't support
> it, which may suggest it's not needed for compatibility any more, but as
> far as I can tell removing it would break enough to make it infeasible.
>
> As such, we should spec it: likely block-scoped in modules, and
> function-scoped otherwise. We should only really not spec it if we can get
> everyone who currently supports it to drop it.
>

IE has consts, use execScript with vbs. I think Andrea did a blog post on
it:
<
http://webreflection.blogspot.co.uk/2007/10/cow-javascript-define-php-like-function.html
>

The const keyword is a little freaky overall, Firefox seems to support it
yet Opera (last time I checked) supports the keyword but doesn't perform a
const operation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20120419/b51c061e/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list