Lars Hansen wrote:
> In my opinion the following is roughly right:
>
> obj.eval(x)
> if eval is the original global eval function then
> if obj is an ES global object (window, frame) then
> invoke eval as follows:
> the scope chain holds that window (global) object only
> the variable object is that window object
> the value of "this" is that window object
> else
> this is an error
> else
> we don't care; invoke the method eval on obj
>
> eval(x)
> look up "eval"
> if the found value v is the original eval function and
> the binding object x holding eval is an ES global object and
> the global object on the scope chain for v is x then
> invoke eval as follows:
> the scope chain is the lexical chain in effect at the point of
> invocation
> the variable object is the innermost variable object in effect
> (which is to
> say that it excludes binding objects introduced for "let",
> "catch", named
> function expressions, "switch type", and note also that
> code at the top
> level of a class is static initialization code so the
> variable object
> is the global object)
> the value of "this" is the global object x
> else
> we don't care; invoke v as a normal function
Seems reasonable, although anything dealing with eval evil can get tricky.
What about the other cases such as:
obj.foo(x)
foo(x)
new foo(x)
where foo happens to contain the original eval function. Do you try to do the
eval, throw an EvalError, or do something else? ES3 gave the implementations a
choice of either doing the eval or throwing an EvalError.
Waldemar
_______________________________________________
Es4-discuss mailing list
Es4-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
