Sam Goto

Apologies for the silly question, but just to see if I understand this correctly: * ```A``` is an object with a property ```f``` that is a function * ```B``` is...

That's a good question, and that's the sort of challenge that would be a massive deal breaker to me. I don't think this feature would carry its weight if it...

> To clarify, the current design effectively ends any future additions that use the following grammar: Just to make sure I understand, but option 2 outlined above would address this,...

Right, this came up while running this by @waldemarhorwat. In the current formulation, as @leobalter said, these two things would mean different things. ``` a {} ``` Are two statements,...

Ah, fair, yes, a block. Still, point being that this is NOT equivalent to a(function {}). Makes sense? On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Leo Balter wrote: >...

> a NoLineTerminator is certainly required to avoid breaking a matching LHSExpressoin + a Block @leobalter 's recommendation works for me. I'm going to keep this open just to make...

It certainly feels awkward for ```unlesss``` to have the ability to return anything to ```a``` that wasn't written lexically inside of ```a``` in the block param. Because receivers are written...

I was originally thinking that the caller would set ```this``` and pass the right methods that are supported. For example: ```javascript function a(block) { block.call({ b: function(block) { // ......

> I addressed this in 1 and 2 of my first comment: this, as in b.call(this, function() {, is undefined in > strict mode code and global in non-strict mode...

WRT > I explicitly addressed this in number 3 of my first comment. and > (2) falls down when the user defined functions have an explicit this object set: Yes,...