Nested function X vs. nested varX = function

These seem to do the same thing, beyond the source code differences, are
there any differences ?

function foo () {
y = bar(2)
return
function bar (x) {return x*x}
}

function foo () {
var bar = function(x) { return x*x }
y = bar(2)
return
}

I recall Lasse mentioning a one-pass. Now I see it, In the first foo the
bar function is available prior to it's definition because of the one-pass.
In the second foo, the function var bar has to be assigned before it can be
used.

Where is a good reference discussing the 'one-pass' or 'first-pass' ?

--
Richard A. DeVenezia

re: Nested function X vs. nested varX = function

"Richard A. DeVenezia" <radevenz@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message news:<bji3j2$jjdus$1@ID-168040.news.uni-berlin.de>...
[color=blue]
> Where is a good reference discussing the 'one-pass' or 'first-pass' ?[/color]

The ECMA-262 standards, although it will not use that terminology. See
the section on execution contexts.
[color=blue]
> These seem to do the same thing, beyond the source code differences, are
> there any differences ?[/color]

I believe they are so minimal as to be irrelevant (unless someone sees
something I do not). But here is one. Change the "return" statements
to "return bar.toString()" and compare the results. The first is a
named function object; the second is an anonymous function object
assigned to a variable.

At first I was unsure of the intent of your first function's return.
Is it "return;" or "return function bar (x) {return x*x};"? I figured
it was the former, otherwise your question would not make sense.

If you use a code cruncher, the lack of ";" will bite you someday.