Skip to content

Editorial: use "active function object" more often#1585

Merged
annevk merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
more-active-function-object
Jul 21, 2016
Merged

Editorial: use "active function object" more often#1585
annevk merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
more-active-function-object

Conversation

@domenic

@domenic domenic commented Jul 21, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #1541, a few checks on the "currently-executing constructor" were
added. The pull request review revealed that this phrase was not
sufficiently precise, so it was replaced with "active function object",
a term defined in the JavaScript specification. However, this was only
done in one of the three places the imprecise term appears. This tidies
up the other two.

In #1541, a few checks on the "currently-executing constructor" were
added. The pull request review revealed that this phrase was not
sufficiently precise, so it was replaced with "active function object",
a term defined in the JavaScript specification. However, this was only
done in one of the three places the imprecise term appears. This tidies
up the other two.
@domenic domenic added clarification Standard could be clearer topic: custom elements Relates to custom elements (as defined in DOM and HTML) labels Jul 21, 2016
@annevk annevk merged commit cd17646 into master Jul 21, 2016
@annevk

annevk commented Jul 21, 2016

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ta!

@annevk annevk deleted the more-active-function-object branch July 21, 2016 17:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

clarification Standard could be clearer topic: custom elements Relates to custom elements (as defined in DOM and HTML)

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants