Restore the call and apply methods when adding a chainable method
#140
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…nable method. This was broken on platforms that have `__proto__` support. Details at 514dd6ce4#commitcomment-2593383
|
I think the first pro makes it worth it, even if we are only addressing edge cases. I don't currently see the need for the others ( |
logicalparadox
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 15, 2013
Restore the `call` and `apply` methods when adding a chainable method
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@domenic found that properties of
Function.prototypewhere not present anymore on chainable methods after__proto__support was added to speed things up.This pull request fixes this. However, I would like to debate first whether it should be added.
Below are my arguments.
pro
__proto__.contra
Note that the associated commit currently only adds
callandapply, and not others such aslength,arguments,name,caller,bind,toString. If you think this is necessary, let me know.Also note that the property case was never broken (i.e., the assertions on lines 235 and 236 pass without the modification). Only when the property was called as a method, things didn't go as expected.