I never claimed it was. I'm sure the notion of "value" that ECMAScript wants to convey is supposed to be something along the lines of "can be bound to an identifier".
The semantics that are then defined over primitive/non-primitive values are a completely different matter. On Saturday, August 19, 2017 8:44:08 PM CEST Naveen Chawla wrote: > But references are also values. It's not a mutually exclusive thing > > On Sat, 19 Aug 2017, 11:32 p.m. kdex <k...@kdex.de> wrote: > > Yes, objects/functions are values, but they are not *primitive* values. > > > > The current draft uses the phrasing "object value" several times. > > > > Section 4.3.3 explains that objects are "members of type Object", and a > > type > > is, by definition, a set of values. Therefore, objects must be values. > > > > On Saturday, August 19, 2017 7:34:45 PM CEST T.J. Crowder wrote: > > > I recently had an exchange which started out with my "correcting" > > > someone > > > who said "Functions are values" by saying "Function *references* are > > > values. Functions are objects." He/she replied that objects are also > > > values, and after much back and forth, cited [this part of the > > > JavaScript > > > > > > spec][1]: > > > > An ECMAScript *language type* corresponds to values that are directly > > > > > > manipulated by an ECMAScript programmer using the ECMAScript language. > > > > The > > > > > ECMAScript language types are Undefined, Null, Boolean, String, Symbol, > > > Number, and Object. An *ECMAScript language value* is a value that is > > > characterized by an ECMAScript language type. > > > > > > ...and said "So objects are values." > > > > > > Is he/she right? [Wikpedia][2] isn't much help, at least not to me. I > > > > asked > > > > > a friend who, unlike me, did get comp sci theory at Uni, and he said > > > "...you're not wrong, but it's very Humpty Dumpty: When I use a word, it > > > means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less." > > > > > > I've used the term "value" in explanations of variables, properties, and > > > function arguments and in particular when explaining why `b = a` copies > > > > an > > > > > object reference, not an object, from `a` to `b`. (Saying the *object > > > reference* is the value.) It's been an invaluable aid to helping people > > > "get" object references. > > > > > > I'd be very sorry to hear that I was misusing a term of art. But I'd > > > > rather > > > > > know. :-) > > > > > > If I'm misusing "value," what should I use instead for that thing that > > > actually gets stored in memory? How to explain the `b = a` thing with > > > object references to beginners? > > > > > > This is slightly off-topic for the thread, but also not, as I spend a > > > lot > > > of time explaining things to JavaScript beginners, and the authors of > > > the > > > text being used to tell me I'm wrong are on this list. :-) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > -- T.J. Crowder > > > > > [1]: > > http://www.ecma-international.org/ecma-262/8.0/index.html#sec-ecmascript-l > > an> > > > guage-types [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(computer_science) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > es-discuss mailing list > > es-discuss@mozilla.org > > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list es-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
