I agree with what you say: putting the static methods (which doesn't modify the object) are in the namespace than the prototype.
I just made some tests and "discovered" (noticed would be better) than the Object behaves a bit differently. They get something in addition to the other native types, and the prototype is searched when trying to access a non-existent property. http://jsfiddle.net/8DG63/4/ This doesn't work with other native types (Number, String, etc.) and accessing a non-existent property doesn't search through the native's prototype to fetch the it. My next question (which is more an observation I can't really explain) is about accessing non-existent properties. Reading the typeOf() function, I have been reading (item.$family) and this popped in my mind: - What if the $family property doesn't exists, that can happen, right? I've always been screwed by this ReferenceError Exception: "undefined variable <name here>". So I did some tests and observed that no exception is thrown when accessing an undefined property. I find this quite inconsistent, but that's the language and how it works... The real question is: can I solve this annoying thing by checking window.myUndefinedVar (or window['myUndefinedVar']) instead of the var directly to get rid of this? I'm not wanting to silently avoid this undefined exception thing, it could just simplify a lot something like this: if (typeof(myVar) != 'undefined' && myVar != null) could be simplified as: if (window.myVar != null). Is it safe? On 8 fév, 13:44, Christoph Pojer <[email protected]> wrote: > Those methods are static methods on the native types. Methods on the > prototype modify the object they are called from, static methods just act on > the passed arguments. > > In the same way, ' abc '.trim() is a dynamic method while Object.each(obj, > fn) is static.
