Yep, thanks Angus
Regarding FEs - FDs, personally for casual helper procedures I use FDs I
usually use FDs. E.g.:
// library
(function (global) {
function format(data) {
/* code */
}
function isCorrect(x) {
/* implementation */
}
var thirdHelper = (isCorrect(10)
? fun
Sure I could have phrased it better :-) I guess my point is having a
function assigned to a property or variable makes the syntax
consistent with other objects assignments. Contrast with Java, for
example, where a function is a second class object and cannot be
freely assigned - in that case an FD
@Diego Perini:
Right, yeah, duh... I get it, me being thick (again)... variable
instantiation (declaration) versus code execution (assignment).
On Feb 9, 8:06 am, Juriy Zaytsev wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Angus Croll wrote:
> > Very nice article Dmitry. I share your philosophy of "
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:44 AM, Angus Croll wrote:
> Very nice article Dmitry. I share your philosophy of " more important
> to understand the mechanics than judge it good or bad"
>
> Side note about FEs. I normally prefer over FDs, partly because they
> make top down reading more intuitive but m
Very nice article Dmitry. I share your philosophy of " more important
to understand the mechanics than judge it good or bad"
Side note about FEs. I normally prefer over FDs, partly because they
make top down reading more intuitive but mainly, I think, because they
illustrate that in JavaScript fun
On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 2:50 PM, DaveC wrote:
> Asen Bozhilov:
>
> Yeah, the point I was trying to make is that it's not a standard
> behaviour and yes each of the engines don't throw a SyntaxError - I
> think they should because (apart from Mozilla's), what they do is not
> the behaviour I would h
Asen Bozhilov:
Yeah, the point I was trying to make is that it's not a standard
behaviour and yes each of the engines don't throw a SyntaxError - I
think they should because (apart from Mozilla's), what they do is not
the behaviour I would have expected.
I agree that mozilla's engine behaves almo
Yep, thanks, I aware about FSs. For the complete and detailed
explanation you may check "ES3. Ch5. Functions."
http://dmitrysoshnikov.com/ecmascript/chapter-5-functions/ (where all
this stuff -- FD, FE, NFE, FS, etc is discussed in detail).
FYI: ES6 (Harmony) will standardize FSs. So currently
DaveC:
> I think it worth a further nod wrt function statements inside of a
> block statement.
I agree. My example was to show how can FunctionStatement can be
confused with FunctionDeclaration and that lead more confusion in the
reader.
> ECMAScript allows syntactic extensions, one such extensio
On Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:18:02 +0100, DaveC
wrote:
I think it worth a further nod wrt function statements inside of a
block statement.
ECMAScript allows syntactic extensions, one such extension is to allow
function statements inside of a block statement currently Mozilla is
the only vendor (*I
I think it worth a further nod wrt function statements inside of a
block statement.
ECMAScript allows syntactic extensions, one such extension is to allow
function statements inside of a block statement currently Mozilla is
the only vendor (*I think*) that has added this extension - so I would
adv
11 matches
Mail list logo
