Let me introduce myself before responding in particular. I work at Palm on the Mojo application framework, which includes Prototype as part of its interface and implementation.
I'll post a second message explaining how it is we came to include Prototype, but I don't want to hijack this thread for that. On Tue, Mar 10, 2009 at 3:00 AM, Mislav Marohnić <mislav.maroh...@gmail.com>wrote: > What I want is the community's opinion on augmenting native prototypes: > Number, Function, Event etc. Is it good/bad? Is this what makes you happy > while writing code? > The opinion of the people working on Mojo at Palm as well as our internal application developers is that extending native prototypes indeed makes us happy. One example is the bind() method on Function. Mojo requires application developers to create a certain number of objects whose methods are likely to be used as callbacks, and bind() is invaluable for establishing the "this' keyword in those cases. It would not improve matters at all to have to call Prototype.Function.bind(this.handleRequest, this) rather than this.handleRequest.bind(this). Even if there were an option to run Prototype in a namespace and have it not extend native prototypes, I doubt we would enable it for Mojo. If we did, we'd have to make all the code in the framework avoid depending on the prototypes and use the namespaces, and I don't the what that would do to code clarity in the framework would be worth the theoretical compatibility. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 prototype-core-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
