Andrew, Make sense. Shouldn't that be Function.empty and Function.k, though, to follow our naming rules? And perhaps Function.k should have a more meaningful name.
-- T.J. On Sep 25, 4:20 am, Andrew Dupont <goo...@andrewdupont.net> wrote: > Unless anyone has serious objections, or has a better idea, I'm going > to add these as aliases of `Prototype.emptyFunction` and > `Prototype.K`, respectively. They belong better there, since in theory > the `Prototype` namespace is for internal stuff, not for stuff that > has value to end-user developers. > > Cheers, > Andrew --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
