Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
Why parenthesis don't work as you expect You seem to have a rough idea how the this keyword is resolved, so I'll skip explaining that and go straight to your question. I was surprised to find that...
Answer
#1: Initial revision
# Why parenthesis don't work as you expect You seem to have a rough idea how the `this` keyword is resolved, so I'll skip explaining that and go straight to your question. > I was surprised to find that when the above function is called, `this` is still bound to `obj`! It seems that here, `(obj.a)` resolves to not just the function, but also holds information about the "boundedness" of the function! > > I was especially surprised since I had assumed that any code which declares `let v = <some code>;` and then goes on to use `v` was always interchangeable with using `<some code>` inline, so long as it is wrapped in parentheses. The [grouping operator (parenthesis)](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Operators/Grouping) strictly controls the *order* of operations, not the result[^1]. This means that for all intents and purposes, `(obj.a)` is exactly the same as `obj.a`. For illustration, here is another example. ```javascript obj.b = "hello again" console.log(obj.b); // logs "hello again" (obj.b) = "goodbye again"; // Note the parenthesis around obj.b! console.log(obj.b); // logs "goodbye again" ``` --- More technically, neither `obj.a` nor `(obj.a)` resolve to a function; they resolve to a *reference*. This is why both of them are assignable as shown above. This is also why in your example they appear to hold information about the "boundedness" of the function - references in JavaScript contain information such as the parent of the referenced property (what the specification calls a "base value component") and this is part of what determines what `this` gets bound to. # Misc answers > * Is this intentional functionality? (I assume so) Yes. > * What technical vocabulary can be used to describe this situation? (E.g. "boundedness" is my own invention) * `this` binding - How the `this` keyword is bound to a reference. * References - JavaScript has a kind of weird way of doing references, so you should probably look at this more in depth. * Execution context - This determines how `this` is bound. > * Where in the spec is this behaviour outlined? * `this` keyword: https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-this-keyword * Grouping operator: https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-grouping-operator * References: https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-reference-specification-type [^1]: This in itself is sort of an abstraction, but it shows the concept. The *really* technical details are beyond this answer, so go read the spec if you're interested.