I wonder if all of this is expected:
(function(){
use strict;
function caller() {
alert(caller.caller);
}
// error if invoked: caller();
// but showing up in properties
var properties = Object.getOwnPropertyNames(caller);
if (properties.indexOf('caller')) {
what I've written here:
https://github.com/WebReflection/object-mixin/blob/master/src/object-mixin.js
is a better proposal for the potential `Object.mixin()` in current ES6
specs.
It seems that Mixins Are Awesome and this can take most advantages from
being a function and not only an object:
apologies
getOwnPropertyDescriptor(
source,
key
)
should have been
getOwnPropertyDescriptor(
enricher,
key
)
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 1:58 AM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
what I've written here:
also, in case you are guessing the typo .. reacher because it could reach
more (older) engines, doing a joke with richer got it? .. too damn
fun, I know!
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 2:04 AM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
apologies
getOwnPropertyDescriptor(
Le 13/04/2013 09:31, Andreas Rossberg a écrit :
On 13 April 2013 00:12, Brandon Benvie bben...@mozilla.com wrote:
3.) A new type of primitive along with a new type of wrapper. In this case
we use the String/Number/Boolean precedent where `Symbol()` and `new
Symbol()` produce different kinds of
On Sunday, April 14, 2013, Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
I wonder if all of this is expected:
(function(){
use strict;
function caller() {
alert(caller.caller);
}
// error if invoked: caller();
// but showing up in properties
var properties =
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Kevin Smith zenpars...@gmail.com wrote:
Put concretely: if Futures are provided via libraries, but you can't
assume (require) libraries, then you can't design DOM APIs around Futures.
Clearly, one way to solve this is put Futures into the language, but
generalizing means that for any generic object we should try/catch to avoid
that error ? talking about automated code ... the whitelist is everyday
bigger :)
Thanks for the answer
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.comwrote:
On Sunday, April 14, 2013, Andrea
I think I've taken us off into the weeds, and I apologize. What I was
trying to say is that library authors have an advantage over platform
authors, in that they can require other libraries.
No - this is good input. You want to be able to modularize your platform
API, and not have to hang
OK, maybe just code was a non-sense ...
So, the idea behind is mark a function explicitly as mixin ... how ?
Any function that is passed and has an empty prototype (then is user
defined or native) could be considered invocable as mixin.
function addFunctionality() {
this.method = function ()
right, I've simplified a lot and tested cross platform:
https://github.com/WebReflection/object-mixin#object-mixin
thoughts?
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, maybe just code was a non-sense ...
So, the idea behind is mark a
Lending my support to Object.mixin accepting a function as the argument—but
no surprise there I guess :)
Note: since functional mixins and constructors are syntactically identical
we can now get gorgeously expressive—and make type inheritance way simpler
(for the first time allowing multiple type
My previous version was doing that in a probably too smart way so I've
simplified the proposal simply accepting, in that example
Object.mixin(Thung.prototype, Thing.proottype);
Object.mixin(Thung.prototype, Thang.proottype);
It does not look so black magic anymore but it's way less ambiguous
yeah that's better - I was having a senior moment - most constructor
functions will normally reside in the prototype of course
On Sun, Apr 14, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
My previous version was doing that in a probably too smart way so I've
somebody already raised the concern what if I want to mixin the function
as object, not as callable
I think being [[Call]] not possible to mixin as object functionality, and
being functions all by default having ownProperties such [arguments,
name, length, caller] .. that would simply clash so
On Apr 9, 2013, at 11:30 , Nebojša Ćirić wrote:
We need to support conversion between:
{Y, M, D, H, M, S, AnyTimeZone*} = {UTC Epoch millis}
*AnyTimeZone - doesn't have to be system one, supports IANA tz format.
I proposed one direction of this mapping a while ago as public API for
On Apr 9, 2013, at 15:23 , Nebojša Ćirić wrote:
I'll add this as a second option to the strawman.
2013/4/9 Sorin Mocanu sorinmoc...@google.com
Thank you Nebojša.
How about if the [timezone] parameter would only be passed at the
construction of the Date object? That would (perhaps)
Hi, maybe one should discuss terminology first.
What has been rediscovered within the last decade every now and again by
JavaScript programming individuals, this languages capability for
functional or function based mixins, might deserve a closer look, before
running into what I would call a meta
Brendan Eich wrote:
... https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/2013-February/028631.html
It looks like the setter throws only if called on an object from a
different realm, so maybe it will work for your intended uses. It
won't work cross-frame, in other words.
/be
Great! Will the
at least in Firefox is working like that:
var blackMagic = Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(
Object.prototype, '__proto__'
).set;
var NaO = Object.create(null);
var o = {};
blackMagic.call(NaO, o);
o.isPrototypeOf(NaO); // true
if this will work cross browser like this adopting a method
not sure changing name is a thing to promote, it makes method name clashing
easier but it can be achieved simply attaching properties to a specific
object and then pass that as mixin ...
Object.mixin(target, {
on: source.addEventListener,
off: source.removeEventListener,
has:
updated API with Trait and the extra argument:
https://github.com/WebReflection/object-mixin#api
how does the code look like now:
https://github.com/WebReflection/object-mixin/blob/master/src/object-mixin.js
is your browser passing all tests? (if green, yes)
22 matches
Mail list logo
