It looks like that in a number of these cases, what is being tested is the
number of declared arguments to the jquery Sizzle function which is a module
function for its selector engine. Very early versions of Sizzle seem to have
had 3 formals
(https://github.com/jquery/sizzle/commit/51ba62312
Here's a log with complete decompilation including the function whose .length
was accessed.
file:line length function
/be
funlen.log
Description: Binary data
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-
On Aug 29, 2011, at 4:38 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
> 2) the number of parameter positions (including the rest parameter if
> specified) that precede the first default-value parameter (or the end of the
> list if there are no default-value parameters):
> function (a,b,c) {} //length==3
> fu
On Aug 29, 2011, at 1:36 PM, Brendan Eich wrote:
>
> You can't use one integer-valued property to convey two meanings. F.length is
> either minimum non-default/rest parameters, or a count of non-rest
> parameters. I don't see a sane alternative. The count of non-rest parameters
> is not that
On Aug 27, 2011, at 3:06 PM, Oliver Hunt wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 2:42 PM, Dmitry Soshnikov wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Aug 27, 2011 at 11:53 PM, John-David Dalton
>> wrote:
>> > No. It's the global object what is the base (more precisely, its DOM's
>> > proxy wrapper -- `window` or either the glo
On Aug 29, 2011, at 11:29 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>> Hm, that doesn't sound like a very JavaScripty argument :). If you buy
>> into optional arguments at all, then I can certainly envision valid
>> use cases for combining them with rest arguments.
>
> Which is the source of the potential con
On Aug 28, 2011, at 4:36 PM, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
>
>> On 27 August 2011 00:34, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>>> If the formal parameter list includes any non-optional, non-rest formal
>>> parameters, the length is the total number of non-op
On Aug 29, 2011, at 2:32 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> On 29 August 2011 01:36, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
>>> True, and actually, there are more issues with length & function
>>> proxies. I don't have my notes with me right now, but for exam
On Aug 29, 2011, at 7:43 AM, Tom Van Cutsem wrote:
> (changed subject to fork off discussion on function proxies)
>
> 2011/8/29 Allen Wirfs-Brock
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> > True, and actually, there are more issues with length & function
> > proxies. I don't hav
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 7:43 AM, Tom Van Cutsem wrote:
> (changed subject to fork off discussion on function proxies)
>
> 2011/8/29 Allen Wirfs-Brock
>
>> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
>> > True, and actually, there are more issues with length & function
>> > proxies. I d
(changed subject to fork off discussion on function proxies)
2011/8/29 Allen Wirfs-Brock
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
> > True, and actually, there are more issues with length & function
> > proxies. I don't have my notes with me right now, but for example, it
> > is n
On 29 August 2011 01:36, Allen Wirfs-Brock wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2011, at 6:12 AM, Andreas Rossberg wrote:
>> True, and actually, there are more issues with length & function
>> proxies. I don't have my notes with me right now, but for example, it
>> is not clear at all what length Function.prototyp
12 matches
Mail list logo
