Can/should objects share methods in certain circumstances?
I am currently working on a web application that is supposed to resemble an operating system with GUI (it manages processes and windows). I have several constructors which deal with different aspects of the program, such as Process and Window. There are a few built-in programs which use a special API and a utility function to extend Process and add certain methods to the prototype.
When to use prototypical programming in JavaScript
I’ve spent a good bit of time developing simple widgets for projects in the following way:
Why is extending the DOM/built-in object prototypes a bad idea?
I’m looking for a definitive answer to why extending built-in prototypes is so heavily chastised in the JS developer community. I’ve been using the Prototype JS framework for a while, and to me doing [1,2,3].each(doStuff) seems much more elegant than $.each([1,2,3], doStuff). I know that it creates “namespace pollution,” but I stil don’t understand why it’s considered to be a bad thing. Also is there any real performance degradation associated with extending built-in prototypes? Thanks!
Why is extending the DOM/built-in object prototypes a bad idea?
I’m looking for a definitive answer to why extending built-in prototypes is so heavily chastised in the JS developer community. I’ve been using the Prototype JS framework for a while, and to me doing [1,2,3].each(doStuff) seems much more elegant than $.each([1,2,3], doStuff). I know that it creates “namespace pollution,” but I stil don’t understand why it’s considered to be a bad thing. Also is there any real performance degradation associated with extending built-in prototypes? Thanks!
Why is extending the DOM/built-in object prototypes a bad idea?
I’m looking for a definitive answer to why extending built-in prototypes is so heavily chastised in the JS developer community. I’ve been using the Prototype JS framework for a while, and to me doing [1,2,3].each(doStuff) seems much more elegant than $.each([1,2,3], doStuff). I know that it creates “namespace pollution,” but I stil don’t understand why it’s considered to be a bad thing. Also is there any real performance degradation associated with extending built-in prototypes? Thanks!
Why is extending the DOM/built-in object prototypes a bad idea?
I’m looking for a definitive answer to why extending built-in prototypes is so heavily chastised in the JS developer community. I’ve been using the Prototype JS framework for a while, and to me doing [1,2,3].each(doStuff) seems much more elegant than $.each([1,2,3], doStuff). I know that it creates “namespace pollution,” but I stil don’t understand why it’s considered to be a bad thing. Also is there any real performance degradation associated with extending built-in prototypes? Thanks!
Managing scaffolding for debug vs production builds
The more I program the more I realize that most of my time is spent writing scaffolding for programs so that I can debug them and then strip away the scaffolding for production.
Managing scaffolding for debug vs production builds
The more I program the more I realize that most of my time is spent writing scaffolding for programs so that I can debug them and then strip away the scaffolding for production.
Managing scaffolding for debug vs production builds
The more I program the more I realize that most of my time is spent writing scaffolding for programs so that I can debug them and then strip away the scaffolding for production.
Managing scaffolding for debug vs production builds
The more I program the more I realize that most of my time is spent writing scaffolding for programs so that I can debug them and then strip away the scaffolding for production.