er JS VM, not JS JVM. On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:33 PM, David Nolen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:06 PM, Peter Taoussanis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > No. You're still damaging anyone in the final cases - native extenders >> and those who just fall completely through. >> >> Native extenders would go through `native-satisfies?`, no? The object >> extension I'm suggesting would happen after that. >> > > native-satisifes? must come last due to `default` case. > > >> > Now because ClojureScript hasn't hard coded a particularly semantic for >> `get` on `object` you are free to mold the semantics to your specific >> application. Maybe you want to look up the prototype chain. Maybe you want >> to look at some global table? >> >> Is that not something folks would do by extending ILookup? The ILookup >> test would come before the object test, so wouldn't you still get custom >> semantics the same way, with the same performance + flexibility? > > > You cannot extend js/Object with ILookup unless you love JS JVM global > perf regression. You must use `object`. > > David > -- Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ClojureScript" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.
