On Jun 20, 2011, at 7:40 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
>
>> Wow, good catch. That's an oversight -- I don't remember this case being
>> noticed when we discussed this issue. I agree with your conclusion on three
>> grounds:
>
> I remember this,
On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> Wow, good catch. That's an oversight -- I don't remember this case being
> noticed when we discussed this issue. I agree with your conclusion on three
> grounds:
I remember this, or at least, I remember discussions about it. It's no
differe
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Dave Fugate wrote:
>
> http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=conventions:no_non_standard_strict_decls
> [...]
>
> ** **
>
> What’s not so clear though is when the offending FunctionDeclaration is
> generated via an eval:
>
> “use strict”;***
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=conventions:no_non_standard_strict_decls
describes the fact that FunctionDeclaration grammar productions cannot be
substituted for Statement productions under Strict Mode. This obviously makes
snippets like:
"use strict";
try {
4 matches
Mail list logo