Rob, did you get confused?
> > You never see
> > "myMath = new Math()" so there is your prototyping issue.
>
> Because that is a syntax error - the Math object is not a constructor,
> it can't be used with new the operator.
I know, thats why I said you never see it.
You spent quite some time agreeing with me in the context of an
argument.
On Feb 5, 6:44 am, RobG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Feb 5, 10:25 am, Matt Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Math doesn't like prototyping because its a "library" of static
> > methods,
>
> Most native javascript objects are functions that can be used as
> constructors, however the Math object is a plain javascript Object, it
> does not have a [[construct]] property so it can't be used as a
> constructor, nor does it have an internal [[call]] property so it
> isn't a function. It's prototype is Object.prototype.
>
> > always invoked as such "Math.floor(num)".
>
> Some of its properties are functions and that is usually the best way
> to use them, though they can be used in other ways (see below).
>
> > You never see
> > "myMath = new Math()" so there is your prototyping issue.
>
> Because that is a syntax error - the Math object is not a constructor,
> it can't be used with new the operator.
>
> > Also this approach seems very odd to me, such a simple inequality
> > seems absurd. Given your example, and granted you properly integrated
> > this with the number class, how much does the implementation benefit?
>
> > if(num.sign() == -1) vs if (num < 0)
>
> I would expect sign to be a property of a Number object, not a method,
> and to return + or -, not a randomly chosen value, so:
>
> if (num.sign == '-') ...
>
> > if(num.sign() == 0) vs if (num == 0)
>
> > if(num.sign() == 1) vs if (num > 0)
>
> > Seeing this laid out as such kind of illustrates my point.
>
> Yes, it does and highlights why returning -1 or 1 doesn't make sense,
> consider:
>
> var sign = (num >= 0)? '+' : '-';
>
> or
>
> Number.prototype.sign = function(){
> return (this < 0)? '-' : '+';
> }
>
> To see if there is a point in extending Number with properties of
> Math, consider things like:
>
> var x = Math.floor(y/z);
>
> vs
>
> Number.prototype.floor = function(){
> return Math.floor(this);
> }
> var x = (y/z).floor();
>
> It saves 2 characters per call vs an extra 60 or so to define the
> method. It might be faster in some browsers and slower in others.
>
> --
> Rob
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
