[PROPOSAL] "use" keyword

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at gmail.com
Fri Jul 25 14:00:52 PDT 2014


On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> Ah, so you've got a "private" variable (declared in a closure) that
> >> you want to share with other objects which aren't created in the same
> >> closure.
> >>
> >> This is what Symbols/WeakMaps were made for.
> >
> > I'd be interested to see what your approach would be—afaict, this would
> > require exposing the Symbol or WeakMap to whatever scope the foreign
> object
> > is defined in and then there's no point in using either.
>
> Yeah, upon actually walking through my desired example, I found that
> the Symbol/Weakmap is irrelevant.  Here's what I was thinking, using
> only existing stuff:
>
> ```
> (function(){
> var shared1;
>
> function ForeignObject() { /* Uses shared1 somehow */ }
>
> ForeignObject.setSharedSecret(val) {
>   shared1 = val;
> }
> })();
>
> (function(){
> var shared2 = "the real secret";
>
> function MyObject() { /*...*/ }
>
> MyObject.exposeSharedSecret(cb) {
>   cb(shared2);
> }
> })();
>
> MyObject.exposeSharedSecret(ForeignObject.setSharedSecret);
>


Neither of these objects is in scope here.


Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20140725/22d9b03b/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list