Seems like a bad plan to not want to make improvements like this to GWT for 
fear of breaking people's code.  At most the people who already implemented 
it, if any?, have to delete their copy of the function.  Deleting the 
function seems like a trivial low impact modification that find and replace 
would be capable of doing.
 
I understand that it should be final, but the function that I pasted above 
compiles and runs as expected when added to the version of JavaScriptObject 
that I copied into my project to test against?
 
Thanks,
Pat

On Wednesday, July 31, 2013 11:33:39 AM UTC-4, John A. Tamplin wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Patrick Tucker 
> <tuck...@gmail.com<javascript:>
> > wrote:
>
>> I there any particular reason hasOwnProperty is not in JavaScriptObject?
>>
>
> There are a lot of things that would have made sense to put in JSO 
> originally (or likewise on Js*), but adding it after the fact breaks anyone 
> who added a method of that name, as they have to be final.
>  
> The best we could do is put a static method that you pass in a JSO and the 
> key.
>
> It is used throughout GWT and from what I have seen the following would be 
>> the best implementation:
>>
>>   public native boolean hasOwnProperty(String key) /*-{
>>     // In Firefox, jsObject.hasOwnProperty(key) requires a primitive 
>> string
>>     key = String(key);
>>     return (this.hasOwnProperty(key)) ? true : false;
>>   }-*/;
>>
>> Some of the calls, in GWT, cast the key to a string and some 
>> don't.  Seems like a standard implementation that is used would be a better 
>> plan.
>>
>
> I agree a shared implementation rather than multiple copies would be an 
> improvement.
>
> -- 
> John A. Tamplin 
>

-- 
http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT 
Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to