never mind about functions ... forgot for an instant the length is static so typeof != "function" is enough :-)
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 6:17 AM, Andrea Giammarchi < [email protected]> wrote: > I keep finding the frame problem overrated, specially in this case where > the case you are passing DOM nodes between frames is ... well, extremely > edge? > > If NodeList.prototype is instanceof Array then this check is all you need > before Array.isArray(nl) but generally speaking I agree is never that easy > to understand what's utterable "as if it is" an Array, i.e. live > collections as well such getElementsByTagName() > > obj instanceof Array || > Array.isArray(obj) || > ( > typeof obj.length === "number" && > ~~obj.length === obj.length && > (typeof obj != "function" || 0 in obj) > ) // latter for functions used as ArrayLike objects > > so that Arguments, NodeList, LiveCollections, and Arrays, should all pass > this test and we can iterate with common Array.prototype[extras] method > > Do you see problems with above checks ? Anything I am not considering ? > > br > > On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 2:49 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:41 PM, Domenic Denicola < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Apr 7, 2012, at 20:37, "Rick Waldron" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 8:31 PM, Erik Arvidsson < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, Apr 7, 2012 at 17:28, Rick Waldron <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> > As in, its [[Class]] is "Array" and Array.isArray( nodes ) would >>>> evaluate to >>>> > true? >>>> >>>> No, it means that Object.getPrototypeOf(NodeList.prototype) === >>>> Array.prototype. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, this part was clear in the links you sent. The question I had was >>> about two things that were not addressed in the links (that I could see, >>> please correct if I missed them) >>> >>> There will be much confusion on the web if Array.isArray(nodes) >>> returns false, while nodes.push( node ), nodes.slice( 0, 2 ) "just work", >>> especially during periods of transition from DOMx to DOM4. >>> >>> >>> Rick >>> >>> >>> >>>> Fortunately all the Array.prototype methods are generic so it all just >>>> works. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> erik >>>> >>> >>> >>> I think the benefits are so great I'm happy to deal with any confusion. >>> >> >>> Although, it sounds like I'll be wanting to go back to `instanceof >>> Array`, which is kind of funny. >>> >> >> `instanceof Array` is unreliable across contexts (ie. frames) whereas >> Object.prototype.toString.call( thing ) === "[object Array]" is >> irrefutable... That said, I'm sure there is also plenty of code that that >> still expects Object.prototype.toString.call( nodelist ) === "[object >> NodeList]" (as unadvisable as that might be) >> >> >> Rick >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> es-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss >> >> >
_______________________________________________ es-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
