[[Invoke]] and implicit method calls

Mark S. Miller erights at google.com
Mon Sep 23 18:58:57 PDT 2013


What does "f's handler" refer to? If obj is a proxy and f is not, then obj
has a proxy and f does not.


On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:

>
> On Sep 23, 2013, at 6:14 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
>
> > Hi Allen,
> >
> > Your line of thinking has convinced me that `invoke` as it currently
> stands doesn't really fly.  However, I have an issue with your proposal.
>  Take this fragment:
> >
> >     (1) function f() { doSomethingWith(this); }
> >     (2) f.call(obj);
> >
> > Presently, the expression at (2) grants the function `f` access to
> `obj`.  If I understand correctly, under your proposal the expression at
> (2), in the case where `obj` is a proxy, additionally grants `obj` access
> to `f`.  Is that right?
>
> In the case where obj is a Proxy f.call(obj) would give f's handler access
> to f.
>
> Allen
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> es-discuss at mozilla.org
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
>



-- 
    Cheers,
    --MarkM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130923/7460dda5/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list