but how would you drop that listener, if that's even a concern of yours, beside the usage of `function`?
Does "I agree with Mark" means already two think arrows function should never be self-reference-able? Just a genuine question, thanks On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Brendan Eich <[email protected]> wrote: > Rick Waldron wrote: > >> function Component(target) { >> let a = function.arguments; >> >> target.on("click", event => { >> // In here, `arguments` refers to the `arguments` object >> // that was created for this invocation of Component, >> // which makes sense because that object has no sense of >> // contextual qualification (something of a legacy problem). >> function.arguments[0] === a[0]; // false >> >> // ...because `function.arguments` here is for this arrow function. >> }); >> } >> > > Joke's not funny if you have to explain it. > > Seriously, I don't buy the explanation. I read the above and I see > `function`used twice. I expect the first use declares Component, and the > second (even though in an arrow, because arrows uphold Tennent's > Correspondence Principal with respect to `this` and `arguments`) to refer > to the activation of the function declared by the first use of that > f-keyword. > > I agree with Mark. > > /be > > _______________________________________________ > es-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
