hasOwnProperty

[thatjessicakelly]

Right now dot-prop will return any property that isn't undefined. But as a potentially unintended consequence stuff like m.get({}, 'hasOwnProperty') will return the non-enumerable method.

Instead of checking just for undefined, maybe it should test obj.hasOwnProperty(prop).

[sindresorhus]

I think that's intentional. If we used hasOwnProperty it would not work on inherited properties.

m.get({}, 'hasOwnProperty') will return the non-enumerable method.

But so will ({}).hasOwnProperty. This module is meant to imitate normal object handling.

[thatjessicakelly]

This module is meant to imitate normal object handling.

It doesn't really do that though, undefined is special cased. If you run ({ foo: undefined }).foo.bar you will get a TypeError, where this module will return undefined. But at the same time ({ foo: null }).foo.bar will throw a TypeError in both cases.

I'm not saying that get({ foo: undefined }, 'foo.bar') should throw– it's clearly more useful that it doesn't.

I just think that it's more useful if get({ foo: null }, 'foo.bar') does not throw and get({}, 'hasOwnProperty') returns undefined.

[sindresorhus]

I just think that it's more useful if get({ foo: null }, 'foo.bar') does not throw and get({}, 'hasOwnProperty') returns undefined.

Yes. I definitely agree with that.

[stevemao]

duplicate of #11?

[stevemao]

@sindresorhus Do you want to ignore inherited properties?

[sindresorhus]

No

[stevemao]

get({}, 'hasOwnProperty') returns undefined.

isn't hasOwnProperty a property of Object.prototype?

[sindresorhus]

Yes, but it's enumerable: false:

Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptor(Object.prototype, 'hasOwnProperty');
/*
{
  "writable": true,
  "enumerable": false,
  "configurable": true
}
*/

[stevemao]

Hmm.. I'm just trying to understand this. I'm not enumerating the properties of an object.. I'm just trying to access it.

[SamVerschueren]

@stevemao I think what Sindre is trying to say here is that if the descriptor tells us that it is not enumerable, it shouldn't be accessed and thus should be ignored. So inherited properties shouldn't be ignored, only non-enumerable properties. Will do a PR.

[stevemao]

if the descriptor tells us that it is not enumerable, it shouldn't be accessed and thus should be ignored.

@SamVerschueren, I just think that enumerability should have nothing to do with accessibility...