Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news1.tnib.de!feed.news.tnib.de!news.tnib.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Jake Jarvis <pig_in_shoes@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.javascript
Subject: Re: JavaScript: Object Definition Extension
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:35:46 +0100
Lines: 39
Message-ID: <9ig7q2Fj0tU1@mid.uni-berlin.de>
References: <887pb7titjugv9u6j6tiv9cjpdv8t6div7@4ax.com> <5d71fb87-8e00-4c50-96db-4ad31589600b@u5g2000vbd.googlegroups.com> <Ts$F80E5FYvOFwbw@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD> <cdvrb7d6ijld51jl1jd2hfksmf8vae95i4@4ax.com> <YuSnExEkLqvOFw7y@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD> <96u2c7lqsl0sg7v34fd99a4294jqrojih7@4ax.com> <GO8h8OImiowOFwDj@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD> <6qb5c75u67t4jg60v5ipc11qu6e4d5it0h@4ax.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de eUDrsjRAogAbA69IWeUSAATkftrPsGbw1+XTsxy+2p3QwOs98=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20110929 Thunderbird/7.0.1
In-Reply-To: <6qb5c75u67t4jg60v5ipc11qu6e4d5it0h@4ax.com>
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.javascript:8360

On 15.11.2011 19:31, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:43:34 +0000, John G Harris
> <john@nospam.demon.co.uk>  wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> However, back when I was writing my javascript note 'call' was new and
>> not in all popular browsers so an older clumsier way was needed.
>> Remember that if you do  a.b()  then the function b is called with the
>> 'this' value set to a. So, we create a property of the Commercial object
>> under construction with the name 'base' (because that's what Netscape
>
>       My question is why a property.  Why not just
>            var base=...
>
>> called it and there isn't a really better name), and use it to hold the
>
>       As there could be multiple levels, "base" is potentially
> confusing.  Visual FoxPro uses "parent".
>
>> function object RealEstate. Now it's easy :
>>
>>   this.base(PropertyLocation, PropertyValue);
>>     // 'this' is the new Commercial object
>>
>> After using it you delete the temporary property 'base' because it's no
>> use for any other job.
>
>       But if you had declared it with var, you would not need to do
> this.
>
>       What am I missing about base's definition?
<snip>

The idea is to have 'this' inside the function you assigned to base
refer to a certain value.

-- 
Jake Jarvis