Brendan Eich wrote: > On May 17, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Mark S. Miller wrote: >> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> >> wrote: >>> Analogous to direct vs. indirect eval in ES5 (15.1.2.1.1), there is no >>> purely syntactic specification for what Neil proposes. A runtime >>> check is required. So I don't see why you are focusing only on syntax here. >> >> I don't follow. What runtime check? For the eval operator, the runtime >> check is whether the value of the eval variable is the original global >> eval function. It makes no sense to have a corresponding global yield >> function value. > > If we reserve yield then you're right. One of the appealing (at least to > me) aspects of Neil's suggestion was that it would avoid opt-in > versioning required by reserving yield (which is used in extant web > content, or was when we tried reserving it without opt-in versioning -- > the particular use was as a formal parameter name, used as a flag not a > function).
Oh, right. We've been talking at cross-purposes. I assumed that you were suggesting that 'yield' should be contextually reserved. That is what I've been saying couldn't work due to ambiguities. -- David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
