"no strict"; directive

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at gmail.com
Fri Nov 16 14:37:44 PST 2012

what I am saying: arguments won't disappear in 5+ years, neither will
caller ... is my crystal ball correct?

On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 2:34 PM, Jeff Walden <jwalden+es at mit.edu> wrote:

> On 11/16/2012 02:11 PM, Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> > but I don't see caller being any better/worse than arguments and I
> believe arguments will stick around "forever" in any case ... so will
> caller, unless there's not some specific personal reason but the code just
> looks basically the same: find the rabbit and "ta-daaaaa"
> The arguments keyword is statically detectable (or can be hedged against
> in the much-worse possible use of eval), which makes it far better.
>  fun.arguments and fun.caller are about equally bad.  And to the extent
> there are "correct" semantics for fun.arguments, engines break those daily
> whenever optimization opportunities present themselves.
> In the longer run the code will not look "basically the same", so arguing
> from what the code looks like now, in any engine, is not especially
> convincing.
> > but on the practical level we all know it's going to be like that, right?
> I don't understand what you're saying/implying here.  Could you spell it
> out more clearly, please?
> Jeff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20121116/44d0f519/attachment.html>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list