Without quotes of course.

Sent from my smartphone.
On Aug 27, 2011 10:33 PM, "Xavier MONTILLET" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> What about property name in object litteral?
>
> Sent from my smartphone.
> On Aug 27, 2011 10:28 PM, "Nathan Sweet" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >>Did ES5 make it valid or was it valid in ES3?
>> The short answer is that it's always been valid.
>>
>> The long answer: A propertyName is simply a sequence of characters that
> refers to the property of an object, and has fewer rules around what is
> valid, than an identifier sequence. The way in which that property is
> accessed, via those sequence of characters is what matters. If a property
is
> always accessed via bracket-notation, then you needn't really worry about
> what sequence of characters composes the propertyName. If you are using
> dot-notation then, unfortunately, you are utilizing "identifier" syntax to
> access the property of the object. There are a few things that have to
> follow "identifier" syntax in JavaScript, a variable declaration, a
function
> declaration, and the dot-notation (I don't think there are others, but I
may
> be mistaken). Theoretically, though not realistically, you could refactor
> most JS code to avoid identifiers altogether. You could use
bracket-notation
> to create anything (ie variable replacement) you needed, and you could
avoid
> function declarations, etc. For more reading on bracket-notation, and
> propertyNames syntax see section 11.5-11.6 of ECMA-262 3rd edition, for
more
> on identifier syntax see 7.5-7.6 ibid.
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Xavier MONTILLET <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> But it looses all the interest of having a nice name for your method.
>>>
>>> Sent from my smartphone.
>>>
>>> On Aug 27, 2011 9:50 PM, "Nathan Sweet" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> >>>Does work in all implementations?
>>> > Although,
>>> > o['delete'] = true;
>>> > is perfectly valid, and will work in all browsers.
>>> >
>>> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Nathan Sweet <[email protected]
>>wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> >>Does work in all implementations?
>>> >> Sorry, Peter's right, it is invalid, but the point still stands about
> the
>>> >> nature of JSLint.
>>> >>
>>> >> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Nathan Sweet <
[email protected]
>>wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> >>And why do jslint and jshint cry? Just a bug?
>>> >>> JS lint is quite opinionated, and wants to direct you towards best
>>> >>> practices. JSLint will tell you not to do things that are perfectly
> valid.
>>> >>> This general opinionated nature is a good thing, because it will,
> overall,
>>> >>> make you a better JavaScripter, but there are times when it
> can/should be
>>> >>> ignored.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 12:24 PM, Xavier MONTILLET <
>>> >>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> Does work in all implementations?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> And why do jslint and jshint cry? Just a bug?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> Sent from my smartphone.
>>> >>>> On Aug 27, 2011 9:20 PM, "Peter van der Zee" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>>> >>>> > On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 9:05 PM, xavierm02 <
> [email protected]>
>>> >>>> wrote:
>>> >>>> >> Hi,
>>> >>>> >> I was wondering when it was allowed to use reserved words. Let's
> say
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > You can use reserved words as property names of objects. You
> cannot
>>> >>>> > use them as variable names. Note that the property names of the
> object
>>> >>>> > literal are not "variables". So in your example:
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > var o = {
>>> >>>> > delete: true
>>> >>>> > };
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > `o` is a variable and `delete` is a property name.
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > - peter
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > --
>>> >>>> > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman
> list:
>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >>>> >
>>> >>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> >>>> > [email protected]
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> --
>>> >>>> To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman
> list:
>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
>>> >>>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> >>>> [email protected]
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >
>>> > To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>> >
>>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> > [email protected]
>>>
>>> --
>>> To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>>
>>> To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>> --
>> To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>
>> To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> [email protected]

-- 
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To search via a non-Google archive, visit here: 
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to