2009/12/15 P T Withington <[email protected]>:
> On 2009-12-08, at 13:10, Mike Samuel wrote:
>
>> All true. And yet it is not uncommon. See the bottom of this email
>> for a quick survey of a number of libraries' uses of the array-like
>> concept.
>
> FWIW, Here is the (separately/simultaneously invented) definition from
> OpenLaszlo:
>
> function isArrayLike (obj:*):Boolean {
> if (obj && ((obj is Array) || (obj['length'] != (void 0)))) {
Please excuse my ignorance, but is "is" equivalent to "instanceof" and
is the use of both obj['length'] and obj.length significant?
> var ol = obj.length;
> return ((typeof(ol) == 'number' || ol is Number) &&
> ((ol|0) === ol) &&
> (ol >= 0));
> }
> return false;
> }
>
> This only shows up in the debugger, and it is used to heuristicate when
> inspecting an object whether to portray it as an Array (possibly with
> non-numeric properties), or as an Object. It's an acknowledgement that users
> do create objects that they think of as arrays. OTOH, we don't do any magic
> beyond that. If a user intends an object to be treated as an array, they use
> Array operations on it (including `for`, not `for in`).
>
> I once had the vain hope that I could say:
>
> function MyArray () {}
> MyArray.prototype = [];
>
> to create my own subclasses of Array. That might have lessened the need for
> isArrayLike.
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
