On Jun 22, 2011, at 8:28 AM, Sean Eagan wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 10:01 AM, Brendan Eich <bren...@mozilla.com> wrote: >> On Jun 22, 2011, at 6:48 AM, Sean Eagan wrote: >> >>> I don't think we need any "safety check" when assigning a method or >>> accessor getter or setter that uses super to an object. The concept >>> of "super" seems to be a relative one, >> >> That is what we are arguing about. It's not a conclusion we all share. > > In ES, functions are first class objects not owned by any one object, > an "absolute" super breaks this.
Functions have static scope (see the [[Scope]] internal property). This is absolute and with very good reason! >> The "current object" -- Axel's |here| -- is not exposed in JS. Exposing it >> requires another implicit parameter, which costs too much. > > I'm not suggesting that |here| be exposed just |super|. Your proposal requires another (implicit) parameter to functions taking super. Since we do not know at the call site whether a function takes super, it requires an extra parameter for every call. This costs too much. /be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
