Why were namespaces removed from ECMAScript consideration?

Posted by Bob on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by Bob
Published on 2010-03-05T22:54:19Z Indexed on 2010/03/09 0:21 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 994

Namespaces were once a consideration for ECMAScript (the old ECMAScript 4) but were taken out. As Brendan Eich says in this message:

One of the use-cases for namespaces in ES4 was early binding (use namespace intrinsic), both for performance and for programmer comprehension -- no chance of runtime name binding disagreeing with any earlier binding. But early binding in any dynamic code loading scenario like the web requires a prioritization or reservation mechanism to avoid early versus late binding conflicts.

Plus, as some JS implementors have noted with concern, multiple open
namespaces impose runtime cost unless an implementation works
significantly harder.

For these reasons, namespaces and early binding (like packages before
them, this past April) must go.

But I'm not sure I understand all of that. What exactly is a prioritization or reservation mechanism and why would either of those be needed? Also, must early binding and namespaces go hand-in-hand? For some reason I can't wrap my head around the issues involved. Can anyone attempt a more fleshed out explanation?

Also, why would namespaces impose runtime costs? In my mind I can't help but see little difference in concept between a namespace and a function using closures. For instance, Yahoo and Google both have YAHOO and google objects that "act like" namespaces in that they contain all of their public and private variables, functions, and objects within a single access point. So why, then, would a namespace be so significantly different in implementation? Maybe I just have a misconception as to what a namespace is exactly.

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about JavaScript

Related posts about ecmascript