Okay then, even shorter.
Brendan Eich wrote:
> But it is not what you proposed.
In what way? Please be more specific, because I don't know what
this supposed proposal of mine is.
For example, those scope questions mention rebinding in a visible
scope, midway through its code block, but that's
On Aug 1, 2008, at 2:43 PM, Garrett Smith wrote:
> What is dynamically inserted? I guess would mean properties added to
> an instance of a non-sealed class.
Right. Those should not be addressable by unqualified names in method
scope -- you have to use "this".
>> so all references continue to b
On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Maciej Stachowiak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Jul 31, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Dave Herman wrote:
>
>>> We should take this problem seriously. ...
>>>
>>> Dynamic scope is very bad.
>>
>> Specifically:
>>
>> - Classes are supposed to provide integrity, but dynamic sco
On Jul 31, 2008, at 5:24 AM, Dave Herman wrote:
>> We should take this problem seriously. ...
>>
>> Dynamic scope is very bad.
>
> Specifically:
>
> - Classes are supposed to provide integrity, but dynamic scope makes
> the
> internals of code brittle; any variable reference inside the
> implem
>>
>> In AS3, the reference to bar in the zot function would be bound to
>> this.bar
>
> I don't follow. There is no `this.bar` in the class where zot is defined.
>
Sorry, I said that backwards. When class foo is compiled, there is no
member called bar, so the reference is bound to the global var
