+1

> On Dec 1, 2016, at 8:48 AM, Sundararajan Athijegannathan 
> <sundararajan.athijegannat...@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Good catch Hannes! Please review the updated webrev : 
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8170565/webrev.01/
> 
> PS. Had to use Function.prototype.call.call to pass undefined this explicitly 
> (as JSObject.call can't be called from script).
> 
> -Sundar
> 
> On 01/12/16, 3:13 PM, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Hi Sundar,
>> 
>> The problem with this approach is that it will replace any occurrence of 
>> undefined this with the global object. However, this should only occur for 
>> scope calls. For example, the following call would see undefined replaced 
>> with global:
>> 
>> func.call(undefined)
>> 
>> This is probably not a problem that will occur very often, but ideally I 
>> think we should do the check and replacement on the linking side, i.e. in 
>> JSObjectLinker.findCallMethod.
>> 
>> On the other hand we can’t check for function strictness that way. Maybe do 
>> it your way but add a boolean isScope parameter and bind that at link time?
>> 
>> Hannes
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 01.12.2016 um 07:21 schrieb Sundararajan 
>>> Athijegannathan<sundararajan.athijegannat...@oracle.com>:
>>> 
>>> Please review http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~sundar/8170565/webrev.00/ for 
>>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8170565
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Sundar

Reply via email to