Discuss
  • Message History
Rick Waldron (2013-10-21T20:04:26.000Z)
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:19 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:16 AM, Erik Arvidsson <
> erik.arvidsson at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >> There is another thread covering this exact topic at the moment. See
> >> "Scoped binding of a method to an object".
> >
> > Can you clarify the overlap? Thanks!
>
> The overlap appears to be 100% - they're the exact same concept.  It's
> just different words for "add something to this object within this
> context, but not outside".
>
>
Indeed. I had forgotten about this:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:scoped_object_extensionsand
was mistakenly thinking of the "scoped binding of a method to an
object"[0] discussion—which does have overlap, but certainly not aligned
1-to-1 as refinements and scoped object extensions. Sorry for the noise.


Rick

[0] https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-October/034046.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131021/a08e9676/attachment.html>
domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-10-28T19:53:27.917Z)
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:25 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage at gmail.com>wrote:

> The overlap appears to be 100% - they're the exact same concept.  It's
> just different words for "add something to this object within this
> context, but not outside".

Indeed. I had forgotten about this:
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:scoped_object_extensions and
was mistakenly thinking of the ["scoped binding of a method to an
object"][0] discussion—which does have overlap, but certainly not aligned
1-to-1 as refinements and scoped object extensions. Sorry for the noise.


[0]: https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-October/034046.html
Edit