On Jun 12, 2014, at 5:01 PM, Jeff Walden wrote: > On 06/12/2014 03:25 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: >> Actually, if memory serves, IE JScript tolerated null and undefined on right >> of for-in. SpiderMonkey and my ur-JS implementation, Mocha, did not. Someone >> with the jwz nostalgia Netscape 2/3 browsers, please test. > > Hmm. I'm reciting tribal knowledge that I'm probably misremembering at this > point, so I bet you're right.
It isn't listed as a JScript deviation in http://wiki.ecmascript.org/lib/exe/fetch.php?id=resources%3Aresources&cache=cache&media=resources:jscriptdeviationsfromes3.pdf But http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=proposals:bug_fixes says that IE introduced it. I was probably wrong in pinning this on Crock, as it doesn't show up in his "ES4" wish list. http://www.crockford.com/javascript/recommend.html Also see http://esdiscuss.org/topic/for-in-statement-null-and-undefined if you have any interest in tracing the history of this change. > >> I don't think bug-hiding precedent trumps bug-finding, personally. Allen? > > Agreed. It sounds like the the tide is swinging towards bug finding rather than consistency in this case. I'm fine with and and will update the spec. accordingly. Allen
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
