Function "name" property

Rick Waldron waldron.rick at
Mon Mar 2 09:22:08 PST 2015

On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 4:17 AM Leon Arnott <leonarnott at> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 1, 2015 at 3:28 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at>
> wrote:
>> If you want both a TCP-able from and a local (most closely enclosing
>> callable thing) form then the later should also presumably also be
>> applicable at the top level of functions.
>> The 'in'  meta property prefix in combination with the 'function'  prefix
>> could do that job:
> One thing I feel about meta-properties is that they really should have
> some connection to the keyword's normal meaning, as is true of
> "in" currently exclusively refers to inherited property access, both as an
> operator and as a for-in keyword, and repurposing it to mean "invocation"
> when there's a meta-property attached is, well, not something I'd be proud
> of explaining.

Strong agreement here. If `in` grows meta properties, they should by
relevant to what the `in` operator does (which may mean none at all).

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list