Brendan Eich wrote:
But the lexical part doesn't enter into the contract of the API taking the function argument. It's between the API caller and the function argument's implementation -- when the latter is a closure in the former, lexical |this| often wins.
What does enter into the contract of the API taking the function argument is whether |this| is dynamically bound and passed with the expectation that the funarg not use some other |this|. But even then, the funarg is free to ignore |this|.
Between lexical-this and no-this, Kevin's analysis shows 80-90% (high end helped by method definition shorthand) coverage.
Thinking about arrows as a new thing to teach is fine, but we should not teach myths. |this| binding in JS today requires careful thought in all the usual scenarios: constructor, method, callback, global or local function. You can see why some advocate no-this uber alles!
But lexical-this is (if memory serves) around 40-50% gross of the 80-90% Kevin studied. That's big and we know people get that wrong.
If there's a strong use-case for -> as function shorthand, we should consider adding -> too. But the use-cases don't look strong enough yet, at least not to me (and I'm sympathetic!) to go back to TC39 asking for -> on top of =>.
/be _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
