Use of named function expressions can cause scoping issues in some implementations

[ckknight]

In a recent commit, many functions have been changed to be defined as named function expressions, e.g. var bound = function bound(). One of the issues that arises from this is that in JScript (IE), var bound and function bound create two separate functions.

See http://kangax.github.com/nfe/ for more details about this.

[Gozala]

Thanks @ckknight for pointing that out, I did not knew about that bug. Still as bound with in the bound function is only used for instanceof it will work as expected since both functions will have same prototype. Also I guess it's probably better and safe to remove var bound = entirely as it's not really necessary anyway. Also all other cases seem are fine as named functions are just saved as properties

[ckknight]

The safest way is to either use the anonymous function expression or to use a proper function declaration. They're essentially equivalent (aside from the hoisting).

[Gozala]

On Monday, 2011-03-28 at 09:25 , ckknight wrote:
The safest way is to either use the anonymous function expression or to use a proper function declaration. They're essentially equivalent (aside from the hoisting).

I believe my suggestion to remove var bound = would make a proper function declaration. Do you mean we need to do more then that ?

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#12 (comment)

[ckknight]

Nope, just go with either var bound = function() { } or function bound() { }.

[ckknight]

Apparently I accidentally closed this. This is still an issue.

[michaelficarra]

I don't see how this is actually a problem. If it was var boundA = function boundB() { ... }, I could see an issue, but it's not broken the way it is. Still, I guess it's better to just change it.

[ckknight]

It's minimally a memory leak in JScript (IE), since it creates two function instances rather than one.

[Gozala]

Change above fixes this issue. closing!