(fwd to list)...
On 9/10/07, Brendan Eich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sep 10, 2007, at 2:41 PM, Neil Mix wrote:
>
> > I think this is what Garrett is referring to:
> >
> > js> function f() {}
> > js> f.prototype.foo = "blah";
> > blah
> > js> var x = new f();
> > js> print(x.propertyIsEnumerable("foo"));
> > false
> > js> for (var n in x) print(n);
> > foo
> >
> > And I have to agree with him, the method is confusing.
>
> Sure, but that ship sailed (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?
> id=57048#c4).
>
> > Based on its
> > name, I'd expect it to return true if the property can be enumerated
> > via for-in loop on the given object, regardless of where the property
> > exists in the prototype chain.
>
> My question remains: is this an incompatible change that will help
> more than it hurts, and otherwise be worth making?
>
Probably have more important things in the language.I read that bug rep't and you stated in the last comment "I still think ECMA is wrong, and should be fixed." I'm considering your question. I would like it to be fixed, but can't say if it's the Right Thing. I'll consider brining it up on c.l.j I'm going to make a blog entry about it, too. Garrett _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list Es4-discuss@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
