Re: Say No to global-by-default

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

2018-07-05 12:26 GMT+02:00 Viacheslav Usov <via.usov@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 12:12 PM Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> 0: Daurnimator, Sean, Marc, Petri, Pierre, Etiene, Dirk, Soni, Thijs,
>> Gregg, Enrico
>
> When I was going over the thread yesterday, I do no think I gathered that
> Daurnimator and Thijs clearly stated "keep the status quo".

They did not clearly state "the status quo is bad" and explained how
they cope with the difficulty.

Thijs did state explicitly that he was 'not necessarily against
solutions to this “perceived problem”', so if you want to count that
as undecided, I suppose you can. But in that case anybody who grants
that default globals are a difficulty but who are satisfied with
runtime ways of dealing with them, might be so classified, even me,
though my attitude is simply "if ain't borken, don't fix it". I prefer
to see Thijs's attitude as the classical liberal one of keeping an
open mind.

> You miscounted me; my proposal was about "make the default configurable,
> keeping the default default as is", with what seemed like natural
> consequences from that.

If that makes you a 0: welcome to the club!

> Where are Axel and Russel in your tally?

Axel has replied while I am typing.

Russell said "I'm not fond of Javascript scope shenanigans" and
"strict is your friend", but then admitted to not being a very regular
user of "strict". I was willing to leave that as "undecided".