On 6/26/07, Richard Quadling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The use of initialise / initialize for me is an issue purely from a
> spelling perspective - both are acceptable spellings but only 1 would
> actually be used. I would suggest 'construct' as the initialise
> method.

We're keeping initialize because a) it's a Ruby convention, b) backwards
compatibility with existing classes.

Also, would there be any mechanism for an AUTOMATIC destruct
> mechanism? (An open Ajax connection should close when the user moves
> off page or something like that - yes I know userland code can deal
> with this via any number of mechanisms, but having it available as a
> destruct method which is called automatically during the onunload
> event would seem like a useful option).

I doubt that we'll ever have something like that. Users who want this
behavior will have to explicitly define how and when do their objects get
destructed. Automatic destruct mechanism would be bloat to the inheritance
support code.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to