No I mean how "foo()" within a class method may be another method call, global function etc, extremely lame "feature"
On Nov 8, 7:58 am, Fredrik O <[email protected]> wrote: > Most of you misses the point, it is sadly. Why it is preferred to have > shorter code (as long it does not add any complexity) is it because it will > make it easier to understand what is happening. That is the largest > difference between a low level programming language and a high level > programming language. It is the same thing when anyone type 1+1. It is > indeed an abstraction and how it is implemented underneath can we just > ignore. > > In my opinion it is indeed better to group methods close to each other. My > helper does not add any direct complexity and no "context" is lost, as long > we know what we helper does as we do. However it has some advantages: > > - It forces the user to write code which can easily be highly optimized by > the JavaScript engine. All class methods will be defined in the prototype > and all variables be bound to the object context. No need to be a good Java > Script programmer. > > - It can take multiple other compile options, so we can example add cache > options, so the helper automatically set up a cache for some methods, > specially deterministic methods. Multiple inheritance can probably also be > properly implemented, so the instanceof operator will work as it can be > expected, which in that case would be better to use than most mixins. > > You most remember that if you create a mixin and when assign 10 different > prototypes a set of methods (using a mixin) will the JavaScript engine have > very hard to optimize it. What you do is actually indeed multiple > inheritance, but you are not telling the JavaScript engine about it. If you > would, would it probably give better performance, both in speed and memory > consumption. > > You does also a terrible mistake, even if an object has a set of methods, > does it not mean it implements those methods in that way you may believe. > The only properly way to actually check this is to use the instanceof > operator. It would be most safe and probably the fastest way to check this. > > tjholowaychuk: > > I assume when you taking about C++ ambiguous invocation you mean operator > overloading? A line like: "a = b + c" may invoke several functions. In that > case can I tell you it is a huge benefit to the language and is there to > make it easier to human to read, as long it is properly overloaded. -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
