On 11/8/11 2:19 PM, Jake Verbaten wrote:
Flexibility of shared state?
Are you really corrupting the state of defaults at runtime? Do you
really want changes to your default options to propogate to all objects
extending the defaults?
It’s the same thing as redefining a method inherited from a prototype.
Why would you extend the default at all if you *don’t* want changes to
it to propagate to descendents? If you don’t want propagation, make a copy.
This seems like a right pain in the ass to debug/maintain?
In some cases, maybe; in other cases, I think not.
It also can better model what’s going on: if the schema conceives of
multiple objects explicitly sharing the same default, then yes, you *do*
want descendents of the parent to stay in sync with the parent (unless
the descendents themselves have set values). That seems very intuitive
to me.
If you *want* a descendent to be independent of the parent, then don’t
make it a descendent; make it a copy.
FWIW, the YUI thing was pretty unintuitive to me and took me a while to
“debug”.
-FG
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
