I completely agree and was, in fact, going to write my own email on this topic, because I strongly believe we should leave `this` alone in modules.
Instead, let’s turn “module this” into a module-local special variable with a name such as `module`, `thisModule`, `currentModule`, etc. On Jun 9, 2014, at 6:25 , Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote: > https://gist.github.com/caridy/eefb9b104874465d4e1c#2-whats-the-execution-context-for-a-module > seems to indicate `this` will become some sort of module meta object with a > variety of abilities: `this.name`, `this.address`, `this.import`, `this.get`, > and `this.module`. > > This seems like another unfortunate addition to the WTFJS canon, as it > continues to add more confusing meanings for `this` to the mix. > > IMO it would be much better to leave `this` as `undefined`, just as it is in > strict mode scripts, and thus be able to tell a consistent story that in ES6, > `this` is about methods. The current proposal would instead create a world > where `this` is about methods most of the time, but is a magic ambient > variable in some cases (sloppy scripts, modules). This kind of confusion is > evident even in the title of that section: it asks “what is the execution > context for a module,” but it is actually talking about `this`, which has > nothing to do with [execution contexts][1]. > > If a magically in-scope binding is necessary to access module meta > capabilities, giving it a name like `module` or `System.currentModule` would > be much better. > > [1]: > http://people.mozilla.org/~jorendorff/es6-draft.html#sec-execution-contexts > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss -- Dr. Axel Rauschmayer [email protected] rauschma.de
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
