There's a huge benefit to specifying these keywords now: guaranteeing
future compliance of ES 3.1 strict programs.
The cost, on the other hand is fairly small: pick a new variable or
function name.
It's always harder to fix these issues in widely distributed programs.
Some of the challenges faced by the Prototype JavaScript Framework
involve certain methods specified in ES 3.1 (notably the new
Array.prototype methods) which were implemented in Prototype prior to
their specification. Doing so causes significant backward-
compatibility issues and is best avoided.
OT: For what it's worth, that is also why I would find it useful to
specify an Object.prototype.toDebugString method for ES 3.1, even if
the specification is loose. It would just prevent programs from
accidentally shadowing it.
On Mar 18, 2009, at 05:39 , Mark Miller wrote:
On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:56 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock
<[email protected]> wrote:
* For the identifiers we are already confident will become
keywords as
of ES-Harmony -- "const" and "let", perhaps "yield" and "lambda" --
would it make sense to make these keywords now in strict code?
_______________________________________________
Es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
