That's obviously not possible, for obvious backwards compatibility issues.
Best, Tobie On Jan 9, 2:05 pm, evolutional <[email protected]> wrote: > another thing... > > I recently used the Object.extend for the "default options" of a > class. > So I just thought would it not be simpler to use an attributes' order > like this: Object.extend(from, to ) or Object.extend(source, > destination) > instead of Object.extend(destination, source). I mean it is just a > matter of conversion but I would rather prefer the logically order > "from" -> "to". > > regards Tom > > On 8 Jan., 22:22, kangax <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Jan 7, 9:45 am, "joe t." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > How would the core feel about a safe version of Object.extend? > > > > Object.extend = function(destination, source, safe) { > > > safe = !!safe || false; > > > You don't really need this conversion - `&&` (the one that's in the > > loop) already does it implicitly. > > > [...] > > > -- > > kangax --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" 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/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
