Ok, ok, it's a bit that I dreaded opening this topic but the idea of a
shared private channel
between two foreign scopes seemed interesting enough to suggest, at
least to discuss
it.
Thanks to all. :)
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
Hi all,
There is any plan around un functionnality like the use keyword, in PHP.
Why something like that? Because, in JS, there is no way to inject some
variables,
without touch the this object known in a function.
The lone possible way is with ownmade functions, in the same context, by :
`var
Hi,
Le 25/07/2014 20:52, Michaël Rouges a écrit :
Hi all,
There is any plan around un functionnality like the use keyword, in PHP.
Why something like that? Because, in JS, there is no way to inject
some variables, without touch the this object known in a function.
Can you give an example of
I am not sure I understand your problem but AFAIK php introduced use to
simulate JavaScript implicit outer scope access instead of the explicit
global context php is (in)famous for, it comes quite as a surprise you are
asking JS to simulate PHP here :-)
`var test,
fn;
fn = new
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
There is any plan around un functionnality like the use keyword, in PHP.
PHP's use() syntax is because PHP doesn't have actual lexical
closures; it's a hack around the lack.
Why something like that?
Hi David.
Sure... I make a library that that needs to share a private variable with
all methods
of an instance passed by arguments on my lib' method.
```
var lib;
(function () {
var shared;
shared = 'a shared value';
lib = {
method: function method(foreignObject) {
function wrap(method) {
return function () {
var args = [].slice.call(arguments);
args[0] = shared;
return method.aply(this, args);
};
}
foreignObject[property] = wrap(foreignObject[property]);
?
you still have the problem with the non writable methods ... but hey,
that's
@Andrea :
Yeah, I don't really want to rewrite the methods, I only want to share my
shared variable with these methods.
Furthermore, your code don't works because method don't knows shared.
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
___
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David.
Sure... I make a library that that needs to share a private variable with
all methods
of an instance passed by arguments on my lib' method.
```
var lib;
(function () {
var shared;
shared
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.com
wrote:
@Andrea :
Yeah, I don't really want to rewrite the methods, I only want to share my
shared variable with these methods.
Furthermore, your code don't works because method don't knows shared.
You could
the method knows shared as soon as you define it inside your closure ...
```
var lib;
(function () {
var shared;
shared = 'a shared value';
function wrap(method) {
return function () {
var args = [].slice.call(arguments);
args[0] = shared;
return
forgot to fix one of many typos in your initial example too ... `if
(foreignObject.hasOwnProperty(property)) {` ...
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Andrea Giammarchi
andrea.giammar...@gmail.com wrote:
the method knows shared as soon as you define it inside your closure ...
```
var lib;
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Michaël Rouges
michael.rou...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi David.
Sure... I make a library that that needs to share a private variable with
all methods
of an instance passed by
@ TJ, Rick :
I'm really interested too!
On an another side, my next idea, for the same goal, is a thing like :
```Function.prototype.attachContext()```
Where an attachContext call can share the context of the current scope
with the related function.
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.com
wrote:
@ TJ, Rick :
I'm really interested too!
On an another side, my next idea, for the same goal, is a thing like :
```Function.prototype.attachContext()```
Where an attachContext call can share the context of the
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Ah, so you've got a private variable (declared in a closure) that
you want to share with other objects which aren't created in the same
Um, no, I was thinking something like :
```
var fn;
fn = function fn() {
// After the context is attached fn scope already knows shared
};
(function () {
var shared;
shared = 'message';
fn.attachContext();
}());```
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
as a knonw convention in your code that would work but I have no idea what
was anymore the first request at this point.
Best Regards
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On
1. I don't understand what you are trying to do and why
2. I don't think any of this woul dhave been solved anyway with use ,
neither in PHP
Hope others can help more.
Best Regards
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:57 PM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.com
wrote:
Um, no, I was thinking
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:53 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:29 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. jackalm...@gmail.com
wrote:
Ah, so you've got a private variable (declared in a closure)
@ Andrea :
The why comes from an another question : why to reserve the variables
sharing (across the scopes) for the parenst/childs relations.
Imho, some things should be shared with objects out of this of relationship
type, no? :)
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
let's do this way: you write down in some working PHP what you are trying
to achieve and I'll give you back the equivalent JS, if possible ...
otherwise I think I cannot help much here.
Best Regards
P.S. Rick ... lol, true that, but if you imagine those functions returned
and used outside that
@Andrea :
There is no real equivalent in PHP.
I only used the use keyword as example to suggest, in your mind, an
ability to share vars with a foreign function
without to touch the foreign function arguments. ;)
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.com
wrote:
@Andrea :
There is no real equivalent in PHP.
I only used the use keyword as example to suggest, in your mind, an
ability to share vars with a foreign function
without to touch the foreign function arguments.
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Michaël Rouges michael.rou...@gmail.com
wrote:
Um, no, I was thinking something like :
```
var fn;
fn = function fn() {
// After the context is attached fn scope already knows shared
};
(function () {
var shared;
shared = 'message';
@ Rick :
I don't missed but thanks :)
Your example works but not in an private channel between the 2 scopes.
And on your next post, yeah, it's exactly that sharing the pointers... but
in single way (A to B) or (B to A)
And I think to an another Function.prototype method to prevent this effect,
that's the nonsense I am talking about. In php use is defined at function
definition time, it's not something you can attach later on.
In JS you can use .call and .apply passing any context to any different
function, unless already bound to another context, so you have already way
more power than
@ Andrea :
.call, .apply and .bind change the this in the function, then it can't
catch the goal and it doesn't work with non-writable methods again.
It's why my detailled example (
http://esdiscuss.org/topic/proposal-use-keyword#content-4) is written with
object methods (to etablish all
methods again.
It's why my detailled example (
http://esdiscuss.org/topic/proposal-use-keyword#content-4) is written
with object methods (to etablish all constraints).
And don't worry... dont make a fixation on the PHP use, read the last
Rick's post. ;)
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com
@ Andrea :
Thanks for the fixes, I tried but got Internal server error, on edit.
The Tab's solution works but not on a secure channel between the closures.
Michaël Rouges - https://github.com/Lcfvs - @Lcfvs
___
es-discuss mailing list
@ Rick :
Or a more controlled solution might be to create a method able to only
attach one pointer at a time.
What do You think about it?
___
es-discuss mailing list
es-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
I see where this might be convenient, but the down sides are much larger,
similar to `with`, `eval`, or arbitrary global variables. It essentially
destroys the ability of compilers, tools, and people to statically analyze
the code.
I'm all for laziness in code (e.g. destructuring), but not when
32 matches
Mail list logo
