On Friday, September 2, 2011 5:02:26 AM UTC-7, Scott Sauyet wrote:
>
> much more palatable to me. Can you also choose to have immutable
> properties? I would expect area to be only an accessor not a
> mutator. I can't quite buy the notion of an area function that allows
> you to set the height and width. But that is a secondary concern.
>
>
Yes, GSet lets you configure each method as a getter and/or setter.
The .area() method you want would set the first (or "get-index") only, like
so:
var mySquareAccessor = new GSet(theScope,
{
area: [
function () {
return calcArea(this.width, this.length);
}
]
}
);
While the mutator variation sets the vet and set indices, so .area() can
accept arguments, like so:
var mySquareMutator = new GSet(theScope,
{
area: [
function () {
return calcArea(this.width, this.length);
},
'number',
function (w, l) {
this.setArea(w, l);
}
]
}
);
> I would expect some degradation from a naive prototype-based approach,
> but does it degrade too much to be useful? At least for client-side
> JS, I find that many significant performance optimizations in don't
> noticeably affect the end user.
The impact of deep-closures is negligible, numerically speaking, and
subjective otherwise. Principally, however, closures do hurt application
performance, especially when run on poor user-agents. Compared to native
timings, GSet had unconscionably slow numbers (we're talking hundredths of a
millisecond, of course)... I think there are five closures per method. While
there is a place for libraries like GSet and XJSAccessors - until native
solutions are widespread - there isn't any demand. That kind of low-level
object configuration just isn't part of the JavaScript culture, yet.
P.S. Any recent news on your flow code? (I can't remember it's name
> offhand.)
Speaking of Flow, the current version uses GSet. The next version is in
development, and will not use GSet, for all the aforementioned reasons.
However, I do provide some object protection by creatively using the
prototype-chain - if I do say so myself. The result is a much smaller
footprint, fewer closures, and faster performance. I'm busy nowadays, but
will blog something decent in a month or so (don't hold your breath). In the
meanwhile, you can preview the new code on github.
- best,
bemson
--
To view archived discussions from the original JSMentors Mailman list:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To search via a non-Google archive, visit here:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
