From: Boris Zbarsky <[email protected]> > I'm saying that the algorithm in the [[Call]] of those objects (or rather of > the functions being bound in this case) explicitly references a part of the > environment called the "script settings object stack" and expects whoever > plans to invoke that [[Call]] to maintain it as needed.
This expectation seems untenable. It should be the job of a function that depends on global state to specify how that dependency on global state works. What I am understanding from this is that DOM specs have forked the ES spec's definition of [[Call]] to include a hidden "script settings object stack" parameter, which ES is not aware of. It doesn't seem reasonable for ES to take into account these forked semantics, and add a "with script object settings stack X" to each invocation of [[Call]]. Instead, the DOM should specify the details of its forking, and all the places that invoke [[Call]] in ES need to also be forked to describe what parameter is passed for the script settings object stack parameter. _______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
