function(){}();

[ballpointpenthief]

What's wrong with this function?

 

[Henry]

What's wrong with this function?

The total absence of any source code.

 

[Bruno Desthuilliers]

Henry a écrit :

The total absence of any source code.

Is this supposed to be wrong ?

 

[Henry]

Henry a écrit :


Is this supposed to be wrong ?

Where a function is concerned the only thing that is right about not
having any source code is that the absence of code avoids syntax
errors.

 

[Bruno Desthuilliers]

Henry a écrit :

Where a function is concerned the only thing that is right about not
having any source code is that the absence of code avoids syntax
errors.

Indeed !-)

But what I meant was : is this (I mean, the OP snippet) supposed to be
wrong *wrt/ language specs* ? AFAICT it should be legal - even if
obviously useless ?

 

[AKS]

AFAICT it should be legal - even if obviously useless ?

This expression contradicts the specification which says:

12.4 Expression Statement
Syntax
ExpressionStatement :
[lookahead ∉ {{, function}] Expression ;
... an ExpressionStatement cannot start with the function keyword
because that might make it ambiguous with a FunctionDeclaration.

 

[ballpointpenthief]

AFAICT it should be legal - even if obviously useless ?

This expression contradicts the specification which says:

12.4 Expression Statement
Syntax
ExpressionStatement :
[lookahead ∉ {{, function}] Expression ;
... an ExpressionStatement cannot start with the function keyword
because that might make it ambiguous with a FunctionDeclaration.

The corrected version is:
(function(){})();

 

[AKS]

On Dec 7, 1:21 pm, AKS <[email protected]> wrote:

The corrected version is:
(function(){})();

Yes, of course, and I tell you why - this time you use the grouping
operator (11.1.6 The Grouping Operator), which turns function
statement into valid function expression.

 

[Henry]

Henry a écrit :


Indeed !-)

But what I meant was : is this (I mean, the OP snippet) supposed to be
wrong *wrt/ language specs* ? AFAICT it should be legal - even if
obviously useless ?

And what I meant (I said pretty explicitly) was that there was no
snippet in the OP to judge.

 

[Csaba Gabor]

This expression contradicts the specification which says:

12.4 Expression Statement
Syntax
ExpressionStatement :
[lookahead ∉ {{, function}] Expression ;
... an ExpressionStatement cannot start with the function keyword
because that might make it ambiguous with a FunctionDeclaration.

The corrected version is:
(function(){})();

Please see posts 2 and 5 of the following April 10, 2006 thread for a
more detailed explanation:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.javascript/browse_frm/thread/bff638ebc5a4fe21/

Csaba Gabor from Vienna

 

[Dr J R Stockton]

In comp.lang.javascript message <173d0b5e-74d4-4b84-b24e-e33fbbbffc3e@e2
5g2000prg.googlegroups.com>, Fri, 7 Dec 2007 03:44:11, ballpointpenthief

What's wrong with this function?

Reading FAQ 2.3 para 2 sentence 2 will help you to understand other
replies.