[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-35070?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15237820#comment-15237820
]
Harbs commented on FLEX-35070:
------------------------------
Interesting. I was working from memory, and I thought length was iterable. It's
not.
However, my point is still valid when it comes to polyfills.
For example: (ignore the exact code in the polyfill. there could be better code)
Array.prototype.filter = function(a,b,c,d,e) {
c = this; // cache the array
d = []; // array to hold the new values which match the expression
for (e in c) // for each value in the array,
~~e + '' == e && e >= 0 && // coerce the array position and if valid,
a.call(b, c[e], +e, c) && // pass the current value into the expression
and if truthy,
d.push(c[e]); // add it to the new array
return d // give back the new array
}
var arr = ["hi"];
var x;
for(x in arr){
Console.log(x)
}
will give you:
0
filter
> "for each" not working in XMLList
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: FLEX-35070
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-35070
> Project: Apache Flex
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: FalconJX
> Affects Versions: Apache FalconJX 0.6.0
> Reporter: Harbs
>
> I don't have a full test case right now, but I believe the following will
> fail.
> var newList:XMLList = new XMLList();
> newList.appendChild(<foo/>);
> var xmlItem:XML;
> for each(xmlItem in oldList)
> newList.appendChild(xmlItem);
> If necessary, I can put together a (non)working test case.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
