2011/6/20 Luke Hoban <[email protected]>: > My read of the spec is that thi\u0073 is a ReservedWord and should not be > allowed as an Identifer. So the following part of the examples quoted below > should be an early error: > > var thi\u0073 = 42; > > The text in 7.6 seems to address this with: > > "All interpretations of identifiers within this specification are based upon > their actual characters regardless of whether or not an escape sequence was > used to contribute any particular characters."
I don't think this means what you think it means. I think this means that the identifier foo is the same identifier as f\u006fo. But in if (false) alert(1) "if" is not an identifier, whereas in \u0069f(false) alert(1) \u0069f is an identifier which would be the same as the identifier "if" if "if" could appear as an identifier unescaped. Since "this" is not an identifier but appears explicitly in the text, that led me to assume that "thi\u0073" should behave differently from "this". Every browser I have tested treats the identifier "i\u0066" distinctly from the keyword "if". Every browser I have tested treats the identifier "thi\u0073" distinctly from the keyword "this" in at least some cases, but only FF passes all the tests I've come up with. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
