excluding features from sloppy mode

Herby Vojčík herby at mailbox.sk
Fri Dec 28 02:20:01 PST 2012

Brendan Eich wrote:
> Mark S. Miller wrote:
>> Class is an interesting case though, for three reasons.
>> 1) Its body is not a function body, and so it would be yet more syntax
>> to enable a class to opt into strict mode explicitly.
> Right. I don't think we've considered this carefully in TC39 yet.
>> 2) It is a large-grain abstraction mechanism, much like modules, and
>> often used as the only module-like mechanism in many existing
>> programming languages. (Yes, JavaScript is a different language. But
>> we called it "class" to leverage some of that prior knowledge.)
> Won't quibble ;-).
>> 3) It looks as foreign to old ES3 programmers as does module.
> More positive: it looks like a unit of new and stricter code, so it
> could be strict by fiat, implicitly.
>> So I recommend no implicit opt-in, except for module (of course) and
>> possibly class. If class does not implicitly opt in, we need to extend
>> the class body syntax to accept a "use strict" pragma.
> Good, happy to have support for class bodies implicitly strict!

I would like it as well.

> /be


More information about the es-discuss mailing list