On 9/27/2013 9:58 PM, Kevin Smith wrote:
In this case I doubt @iterator or @toStringTag should be visible.
(And I know there a better ways to test for empty objects, but
for-in testing is common enough...)
Thanks Andre! I fear this example merely begs the question of whether
such an object should be considered "empty" with respect to
enumerability. Would anything break if the following object were
considered "not empty"?
var obj = { "@iterator"() { /* ... */ } };
More generally, what is accomplished by hiding these hooks from for-in?
Whether or not some code breaks depends on how that function is used, so
it's hard for me to give a general answer at this point. Concerning your
second question about the benefits of hiding hooks: I'd assume if
something is a "meta-level" hook, it should only be visible on the
"meta-level" and not on the concrete data level. And for-in is rather a
tool to access the concrete data level than to access the meta-level.
PS: The function is called "isEmptyObject" in jQuery ->
https://github.com/jquery/jquery/blob/master/src/core.js#L267-L273
- André
{ Kevin }
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
