[Webkit-unassigned] [Bug 160955] [ES2016] Allow assignment in for-in head in not-strict mode
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
bugzilla-daemon at webkit.org
Tue Aug 23 09:29:42 PDT 2016
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=160955
Saam Barati <sbarati at apple.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment #286712|review? |review+
Flags| |
--- Comment #11 from Saam Barati <sbarati at apple.com> ---
Comment on attachment 286712
--> https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=286712
Patch
View in context: https://bugs.webkit.org/attachment.cgi?id=286712&action=review
r=me with one request:
Can you see what should be done for the following type of programs:
```
function foo() {
{
let x = 50;
for (var x = 25 in {}) { }
// what is x here?
}
// and what is x here?
}
foo();
and
function foo() {
{
const x = 50;
for (var x = 25 in {}) { }
// Should we throw a const assignment error?
}
}
foo();
```
Currently, both Firefox and Chrome throw syntax errors for these programs. However, I suspect that's not the correct behavior as defined by the spec.
If it is, we should also throw a syntax error. If it isn't, we should make sure we do the right thing. I suspect that in the first example,
in the "let x" scope, x should be 25. In the "var" scope of the function, I suspect x should be undefined. But who knows.
> Source/JavaScriptCore/bytecompiler/NodesCodegen.cpp:2560
> +void ForInNode::emitResolveVariable(BytecodeGenerator& generator, RegisterID* propertyName, const Identifier& ident)
Suggestion: An alternative to defining a method is you can just use a local lambda inside the ::emitLoopHeader that does this.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-unassigned/attachments/20160823/ff7e09bc/attachment.html>
More information about the webkit-unassigned
mailing list