Well, to unify against "scope" and "context", i'll throw my $.02 behind "thisObject". It's closer to Mozilla's "thisArg" (which would also be fine).
https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference/Global_Objects/Function/apply https://developer.mozilla.org/en/Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference/Global_Objects/Function/call as others have pointed out, "this" is actually neither scope nor context. :) On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:14 PM, Ariel Flesler <[email protected]> wrote: > > Assuming we do leave it within $.fn.bind(), then I'd say "scope" or > "context". Completely against the other ones mentioned so far :) > > On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 5:02 PM, ajpiano <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> This is definitely useful and necessary. I'd put my two cents for it >> being called either "scope" or "context," which, though "taken," >> describe the actual purpose of the additional argument. "pointer" >> might also be an appropriate name. >> >> --adam >> >> On May 5, 1:22 pm, Nathan Bubna <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Why not steal the term from grammar and call it the "subject"? >>> >>> On May 4, 9:38 pm, "Michael Geary" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> > I don't find this feature all that useful myself, since my callback >>> > functions tend to be a mix of jQuery/DOM, setTimeout, Google Maps/Earth, >>> > and >>> > other asynchronous APIs. If I can only bind an object to a callback in one >>> > of those types of APIs and not the others - or if they each sprout >>> > independent ways of doing it - I may as well just use a closure so I have >>> > one way to handle them all. >>> >>> > But I've seen that a lot of people do like this capability, so I certainly >>> > don't object to it, unless of course it slows down my own code. >>> >>> > My one request: please do not call it "scope"! Not in the code, not in the >>> > comments, and not in the docs. >>> >>> > JavaScript has something called scope, and you create it by nesting >>> > functions lexically (or using the "with" statement). Setting the "this" >>> > value for an event or other callback isn't related in the slightest to >>> > scope. >>> >>> > If you need a name for the concept, you could describe it as "binding an >>> > object to the event handler" or - probably better - "calling the event >>> > handler as a method of an object". I don't know of a short and sweet word >>> > for it, but "scope" is already taken. :-) >>> >>> > Thanks, >>> >>> > -Mike >> > >> > > > > -- > Ariel Flesler > http://flesler.blogspot.com > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
