Sorry, probably I was the one misurestanding your intention, just for the sake, this is how my Invoke is suppose to work: http://www.jsfiddle.net/9A4SK/
and Yes, probably it should be an extension to the Class object and not the Function object :) On 19 Apr, 21:41, אריה גלזר <[email protected]> wrote: > I am not sure that what you are doing is necessary (or that i don't really > understand what it is that you are doing. i could really use a use-case > example). > Class.instantiate does exactly what i was doing - passing a function's > prototype to the function's apply call (nice to know this method exists :-) > ). > > Now, specifically, within the Class function statement, there is already a > call to initialize. so i'm having a hard time understanding when is it > necessary to call Class.instantiate on a function, then call it's > initializer (which, BTW, i'm having a hard time thinking of a use case when > a function will have an Initialize method). > > so - to wrap it up - i'm more and more convinced that i'm simply not > understanding what it is that you are doing with you Invoke method... > ----------- > אריה גלזר > 052-5348-561 > 5561 > > > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 21:58, kentaromiura <[email protected]> wrote: > > > No, is not quite the same, > > If you look at the first version of my gist here: > >https://gist.github.com/299387/bc1f3286c7e695b38786b8aa8d94224c11d48113 > > you will see that to apply for a mootools class, you must using new on > > the class, without initialize, because if you define properties, these > > must be loaded before initialize, than after calling new on the class > > without initialize, you can apply the initialize passing the object > > you created masking the initialize... > > > it works, but after talking with the mootools dev I found another > > simpler way, using Class.instantiate > > and then applying for initialize like in this gist: > >https://gist.github.com/299387/1cf26bf83a0a351e70c63e7044276857572a5e23 > > > @Sanford: > > I used my approach in my IOC container : > >http://gist.github.com/299395 > > as you see, I never call new, because I use Class.Istantiate, If > > you're asking me if istanceof will work, yes, it works :) > > > On 18 Apr, 13:01, אריה גלזר <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Found it! calling apply with the function's prototype ( > > > Class.apply(Class.prototype,[...]) ) is the same as calling new. > > > > hope i'm not embarrassing myself, but the main difference between calling > > a > > > function and using 'new' (at least the way i understand it) is the > > object ' > > > this' points to.http://www.jsfiddle.net/c2dtW/ > > > > This way we can create costum factories to any Function\Object\Class we > > > like. > > > > ----------- > > > אריה גלזר > > > 052-5348-561 > > > 5561 > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 21:34, Sanford Whiteman < > > [email protected] > > > > > wrote: > > > > > I think you wanna look at this gist ;) > > > > > >http://gist.github.com/299387 > > > > > Can you put up a demo of using operator new + opaque arguments object > > > > + returning an instanceof Class using your approach? > > > > > -- S. > > > > > -- > > > > To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
