Setting this to null instead of throwing ReferenceError in a derived class' constructor

[Brendan Eich]

Ryosuke Niwa wrote:
> Having said that, TDZ was introduced to give "let", "const", and alike 
> a sensible behavior as I understand it.  Since "this" was never 
> defined by "let" or "const", it seems a little arbitrary and 
> inconsistent to make "this" TDZ only inside a derived class's constructor.

It's not arbitrary as in a fair coin toss -- it's intentionally biased 
to catch errors. Using null or undefined would find fewer errors.

I'm wondering whether other implementors feel the same pain. I mailed a 
few V8 folks asking them, maybe they'll weigh in.

/be