In general I think this particular approach is not developer
friendly enough.
The function expression name is fairly irrelevant, so you could have
a standard style guideline
foo : function callee() {
callee.base.apply ...
}
This is actually a really interesting idea. I'll try to use it. In
SproutCore's particular case we have a pre-processor that can insert
this also, just like PTW says for OpenLazlo. It's still annoying for
those developers without a pre-processor to help them but better.
--
I'm curious, why not just give anonymous functions a default name like
"callee". Or perhaps have "callee" defined in a function scope to
represent the function? That seems to be exactly the same as the
above; it just makes it easier for developers. Is there a perf issue
here?
-Charles
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
