On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:38 PM, Ger Hobbelt <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Steve Onnis <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Why don’t you use typeof(console.info) to make sure it is what you are >> expecting >> >> >> Compare to the old skool browser sniff (if it's UA X then we got B) > indirect checks versus direct (does this bugger have method B?) checks > regarding DOM access functions. > BTW: if I'd been 100% anal/paranoid about it, it would have been this check instead: typeof(console) !== 'undefined' && typeof(console.info) !== 'undefined' && typeof(console.info.apply) === 'function' where the last part /probably/ would have been done as && typeof(console.info.apply) !== 'undefined' Since there's already one object in there (console.info) which you can treat as a function, I'd dial expectations down as far as "you either get 'undefined' out of typeof or some other crap" and code this with that mindset in charge. -- Met vriendelijke groeten / Best regards, Ger Hobbelt -------------------------------------------------- web: http://www.hobbelt.com/ http://www.hebbut.net/ mail: [email protected] mobile: +31-6-11 120 978 --------------------------------------------------
