One thing I'm surprised nobody has brought up yet is that "global" would be an incorrect name in the case of browsers. The actual global object is not (and must never be) directly accessible. Instead you get a window proxy when you use `window`, `self`, `this`, etc.
As such I think our best bet is for server-side JS runtimes to use `self` or `window`. The latter isn't as crazy as it sounds: just start adding phrases to the ES spec like "all JavaScript code runs within a certain context, called a _window_, which has a corresponding _window object_. In some runtimes the window object will be equivalent to the global object, but not always. Scripts run within _window scope_, whereas modules run in their own lexical context. The value of **this** in window scope is the window object." It's not as if `window` actually means "window" anymore, given tabs and iframes and frames. We might as well move it into the set of terms like "realm" or "vat" or "environment" that are more abstract than real. -----Original Message----- From: es-discuss [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Anne van Kesteren Sent: Friday, April 17, 2015 11:19 To: Andrea Giammarchi Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Putting `global` reference in specs On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 5:12 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]> wrote: > So I'd say we should not have `self` (if stays on global and Worker I > don't actually care) and add a `global` that nobody needs explanation > to understand what it is in JavaScript Indeed, three ways to reference the global object is not nearly enough. -- https://annevankesteren.nl/ _______________________________________________ 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
