Comments on: var self = this; http://almaer.com/blog/var-self-this blogging about life, the universe, and everything tech Sat, 08 Sep 2012 07:06:53 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: replica handbags http://almaer.com/blog/var-self-this/comment-page-1#comment-38851 replica handbags Tue, 24 Jun 2008 09:00:03 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/var-self-this#comment-38851 thanks! thanks!

]]> By: replicahandbags http://almaer.com/blog/var-self-this/comment-page-1#comment-38604 replicahandbags Mon, 19 May 2008 07:00:59 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/var-self-this#comment-38604 thanks for posting this. thanks for posting this.

]]> By: carmen http://almaer.com/blog/var-self-this/comment-page-1#comment-37192 carmen Sun, 15 Apr 2007 20:46:58 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/var-self-this#comment-37192 crockford calls it a 'design error' i think. i mean technically an inner anonymous function _is_ a new object, so it should get a new 'this', no? id definitely like it to inherit via lexical scoping as well, but what can you do. are they fixing this bug in 2.0? crockford calls it a ‘design error’ i think. i mean technically an inner anonymous function _is_ a new object, so it should get a new ‘this’, no? id definitely like it to inherit via lexical scoping as well, but what can you do.

are they fixing this bug in 2.0?

]]> By: Stephen Colebourne http://almaer.com/blog/var-self-this/comment-page-1#comment-37191 Stephen Colebourne Fri, 13 Apr 2007 14:16:24 +0000 http://almaer.com/blog2/var-self-this#comment-37191 Not all closures proposals are equal. In this example: public void process() { foo = bar( { => .... return something; }); } The return will return from process() in BGGA closures as you hint at, and foo will not be set. But in FCM closures - http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddhp95vd_0f7mcns - the return will return back to the invoker of the closure, as with inner classes, and foo will be set. Which semantic do you prefer? Not all closures proposals are equal. In this example:

public void process() {
foo = bar( { =>
….
return something;
});
}

The return will return from process() in BGGA closures as you hint at, and foo will not be set.

But in FCM closures – http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=ddhp95vd_0f7mcns – the return will return back to the invoker of the closure, as with inner classes, and foo will be set.

Which semantic do you prefer?

]]>