Mark S. Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 10:31 AM, Dean Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It seems we have three choices for Array.forEach(null)
>>
>> 1) Do nothing
>> 2) Throw an exception
>> 3) Use the current object and iterate that
>
&g
Mike Shaver wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2008 at 2:44 AM, Dean Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'd prefer Array.forEach(null) to do nothing, just like for (var i in
>> null) does nothing. I'm prepared to be convinced otherwise. :-)
>
> forEach isn'
Mike Shaver wrote:
> Dean Edwards wrote:
>>> Array.prototype.forEach = function(block, context) {
>>> Array.forEach(this, block, context);
>>> }
>
> I don't see how that helps, unless you expect A.p.g.c(null, f) to
> differ from A.g(null, f) --
n
> the page).
>
> Obviously this issue extends beyond browsers, or this specific
> situation, since this could occur in any situation where the global
> object has a length property.
I'll quote from the base2 mailing list:
Dean Edwards wrote:
> I think that the problem is t
> On 12/20/07 7:20 AM, P T Withington wrote:
>
>> Ok. I didn't look in the wiki to start with because of that, hence I
>> ask on the list: can I apply my super's constructor as in the subject
>> line?
>>
Jeff Dyer wrote:
> Sorry, but you can't.
>
That's a shame.
-dean
___
http://blogs.msdn.com/cwilso/archive/2007/10/31/what-i-think-about-es4.aspx
-dean
___
Es4-discuss mailing list
Es4-discuss@mozilla.org
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
