On Oct 11, 2008, at 12:52 PM, Peter Michaux wrote:
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Oct 11, 2008, at 9:05 AM, Peter Michaux wrote:
How to define a variable that is local to the enclosing lambda?
Isn't
the ability to do that essential?
Use let (the var replacement declaration form).
Sounds good to me but it is a little confusing to keep track if "let"
is either in or out of ES-Harmony
I do not see why you are confused. I wrote, in the original
"ECMAScript Harmony" post:
> I heard good agreement on low-hanging "de-facto standard" fruit,
> particularly let as the new var, to match block-scoped const as still
> proposed (IIRC) in 3.1.
See https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2008-August/006837.html
.
and if it is partly in then which of
the several JavaScript 1.7 uses are in and if there will be "let",
"let*", "letrec" semantics.
It's something else. See my reply about hoisting, just sent.
/be
_______________________________________________
Es-discuss mailing list
Es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
