"no strict"; directive
alex at dojotoolkit.org
Fri Nov 16 06:01:05 PST 2012
On Nov 16, 2012, at 1:02 AM, Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com> wrote:
> "use strict" is removed from code by default ... this is where it goes once
> minified: nowhere.
> I would rather force a minifier explicitly to remove it rather than force
> it to keep it for ES5 ... also ES5 is not use strict so I don't get this
> Closure Compiler choice.
> I don't see minified code with "use strict" that often
All this suggests is that we need to improve the state of play in tools. Sounds doable.
That said, you've gotten good answers that you don't like. It happens, and it's better than not getting an answer or getting a bad one.
The polyfill you're working on can be accomplished other ways (http://code.google.com/p/traceur-compiler/). There's always a tax for emulating the new thing with the old, and this case that's caller. More to the point, it's a polyfill; once ES6 lands in engines, class syntax will give you super() for free, complete with whatever optimizations make sense.
If you have performance issues, I recommend what everyone else here has: write benchmarks and file bugs. Beyond that, I think this horse is both dead and beaten.
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Brendan Eich <brendan at mozilla.com> wrote:
>> Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
>>> Said that, I would rather force removal of "use strict" 'cause if there
>>> is explicit desire from the developer. Isn't it?
>> What do you mean? "use strict" is not going away. It is used by some
>> developers. I had a show of hands at JSConf.au, definitely a minority but
>> You are barking up the wrong tree. And Angus's abuses of 'with' are
>> unjustified. Yes, "be water". Yes, masters may break rules students must
>> follow. None of that philosophizing justifies 'with' abusage or
>> repealing/undoing "use strict".
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
slightlyoff at google.com
slightlyoff at chromium.org
alex at dojotoolkit.org BE03 E88D EABB 2116 CC49 8259 CF78 E242 59C3 9723
More information about the es-discuss