From cd17646abd2ccfe17967a0c50803a2b1f623b5e7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Domenic Denicola Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:32:34 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Editorial: use "active function object" more often In #1541, a few checks on the "currently-executing constructor" were added. The pull request review revealed that this phrase was not sufficiently precise, so it was replaced with "active function object", a term defined in the JavaScript specification. However, this was only done in one of the three places the imprecise term appears. This tidies up the other two. --- source | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/source b/source index b8b39d4b899..7e1d4a11cbb 100644 --- a/source +++ b/source @@ -9702,7 +9702,7 @@ interface HTMLUnknownElement : HTMLElement { };
  1. -

    If the currently-executing constructor is not HTMLElement, then throw a +

    If the active function object is not HTMLElement, then throw a TypeError and abort these steps.

    @@ -9712,8 +9712,8 @@ interface HTMLUnknownElement : HTMLElement { };
    customElements.define("bad-1", class Bad1 extends HTMLParagraphElement {});

    In this case, during the (implicit) super() call that occurs when - constructing an instance of Bad1, the currently-executing constructor - is HTMLParagraphElement, not HTMLElement.

    + constructing an instance of Bad1, the active function + object is HTMLParagraphElement, not HTMLElement.