Shouldn't any var declared in the catch block be locally scoped as well?
It seems that all browsers ignore that.
try {x} catch(){ var y; } alert(y);
The above should throw an error, yet it's undefined. In fact, even if the catch
is not thrown y still exists (but if the catch block is not
On Nov 4, 2010, at 10:32 AM, Peter van der Zee wrote:
Shouldn't any var declared in the catch block be locally scoped as well?
var always hoists to top of function or program. Why would it be different in a
catch block? It's not in ES3, which standardized try/catch/finally.
It seems that
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:00 PM, Peter van der Zee wrote:
I guess my confusion came from the notion that catch gets its own scope and
thinking variables in catch statements wouldn't get hoisted until the code in
that scope was entered. Thanks :)
catch did prefigure let -- lexical scope in ES3
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:18 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:00 PM, Peter van der Zee wrote:
I guess my confusion came from the notion that catch gets its own scope and
thinking variables in catch statements wouldn't get hoisted until the code in
that scope was entered. Thanks :)
On Oct 11, 2010, at 4:40 PM, David Herman wrote:
ES3 `catch' is block-scoped. At the last face-to-face, we talked about
statically disallowing var-declarations from hoisting past let-declarations:
function f() {
{
let x = inner;
{
var x =
ES3 `catch' is block-scoped. At the last face-to-face, we talked about
statically disallowing var-declarations from hoisting past let-declarations:
function f() {
{
let x = inner;
{
var x = outer; // error: redeclaration
}
}
6 matches
Mail list logo
