The day undefined will mean "this" in whatever programming language, our
existence will reach the most meaningless meaning.
Regards
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:49 PM, Daniel Friesen
<nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> Whether you think the global object being `this` is an error or not, it
> doesn't change the fact these implied references to the global scope
> create hard to track down bugs just my forgetting a single keyword some
> random place in the code.
>
> `this` makes perfect sense as undefined. You're creating a new object,
> `this` is that object. You're calling a method on an object, `this` is
> that object, you're calling foo() which you just defined in your local
> scope, the global has nothing to do with `this`, it's not the object you
> are calling it on, you're calling it on nothing, so your this is nothing.
>
> `this` still refers to the global object in global scope;
> var originalWindow = this;
>
> If you are desperate to use that function this hack it's perfectly
> possible as well.
> var originalWindow = (function(){return this})();
> (function(window) {
> "strict mode";
> // strict mode code with a safe window
> })(originalWindow);
>
>
> But honestly, what possible kind of js programming have you done where
> you're not writing your code in the global scope? JS doesn't make it
> easy, or very possible to dynamically nest code inside of another
> unrelated set of code. It's all run in global scope unless you use eval.
>
> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
>
> Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> > Daniel,
> > I do not think the global object as default this is an error at all,
> > this is my point.
> >
> > What does not make sense at all is to use a "this" referred to an
> > undefined value.
> >
> > undefined is not an object so "this" which is a self-instance/scope
> > pointer does not make sense.
> >
> > This is the most secure way to obtain the original global object and
> > we are loosing it with "strict"
> >
> > var originalWindow = (function(){return this})();
> >
> > so old browser with "strict" code cannot retrieve the native window if
> > it has been redefined somewhere else.
> >
> > Do you understand what I mean?
> >
> > "strict" will mean double test, double behavior, because of compatible
> > and not compatible browser ... it is truly simple to understand, you
> > resolve "gotchas" ? Trust me, you gonna create even more gotchas for
> > old browsers in this way.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Daniel Friesen
> > <nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com <mailto:nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Strict mode doesn't have new "features", it has restrictions.
> > Strict mode adds nothing over what ES3 already has, it only places
> > restrictions on things which can cause issues or hinder the
> > ability for
> > the engine to optimize.
> > this in functions is undefined instead of global, eval cannot
> > dynamically inject new variables, eval cannot be renamed or passed
> > around in ways that make eval get indirectly called and potentially
> > inject code where it doesn't belong, `foo = 123` does not define an
> > implied global and throws instead, while a nice feature but widely
> > misunderstood while() {} prevents some potential optimizations so
> > it's a
> > syntax error in strict mode, there might have been one or two more.
> >
> > Your code works fine whether it's run in ES3 or ES5. The difference
> is
> > that when testing using an ES5 browser a lot of gotchas like
> > forgetting
> > var in front of a variable throw errors instead of silently
> exhibiting
> > confusing behavior. As well any ES5 browser running the code has the
> > opportunity to optimize the code and run it faster.
> >
> > ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire)
> > [http://daniel.friesen.name]
> >
> > Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
> > > Who talked about users here?
> > >
> > > You put "strict" you do not have that common behavior, whatever
> > right
> > > or wrong it is, but you cannot use new features for
> > compatibility reason.
> > >
> > > Where exactly do you find a better development and debug pattern
> > with
> > > this strategy?
> > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
