The use of named function expressions is not correctly implemented by
at least IE 6-8.
The basic use case works fine (e.g.)
var foo = function callee() {
// do something
setTimeout(callee, 10);
};
But declared as
(function callee() {
// do something
setTimeout(callee, 10);
})();
the name callee leaks to the enclosing scope.
Also, the callee function inside the function body is not the same
function. foo !== callee in IE.
So if you use the function as a namespace, callee.someProperty = "foo"
is not exposed on foo.someProperty.
See http://lucassmith.name/pub/named_func_exp.html
Luke
On Sep 24, 2009, at 3:59 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
On Sep 24, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Charles Jolley wrote:
Given your example, a named function expression would do the job
trivially:
ClassB = ClassA.extend({
foo: function foo() {
foo.base.apply(this, arguments); // calls super!
// other code
}
});
This works but, as I said, this approach has a couple of drawbacks:
1. The function has to be named twice (foo: function foo()). This
makes the code harder to read (especially with long names) and its
not very developer-friendly since its pointless cruft.
2. This is also fragile. If you forget the second name, the code
would still parse but it will be seriously broken. Additionally,
if you decided to rename the function you would also have to edit
the code on the inside. Hurts the "copy and paste" aspect of it.
In general I think this particular approach is not developer
friendly enough.
The function expression name is fairly irrelevant, so you could have
a standard style guideline
foo : function callee() {
callee.base.apply ...
}
--Oliver
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
