Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question.

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.datemas.de!weretis.net!feeder1.news.weretis.net!news.solani.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	"Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question.
Date	Thu, 09 Apr 2015 16:31:50 +0200
Organization	solani.org
Lines	38
Message-ID	<mg62gg$teu$1@solani.org> (permalink)
References	<e7563f81-a11d-4d56-a61a-c0c84f966c3e@googlegroups.com> <mg456a$2sr$4@dont-email.me> <mg47u5$9q8$1@solani.org> <2436927.QxtA20KIfX@PointedEars.de>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	solani.org 1428589904 30174 eJwFwYEBgDAIA7CXVgrFnQMo/59gEhQ06Qp5bCy2ziUXz5eWyTHeeNGwGVLePAewSvdUq34D0A/5 (9 Apr 2015 14:31:44 GMT)
X-Complaints-To	abuse@news.solani.org
NNTP-Posting-Date	Thu, 9 Apr 2015 14:31:44 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
X-User-ID	eJwFwYEBwDAEBMCVCO91HKT2HyF3sNAYeiAci/2owQB1DzLFzHOqRaeNUtlMz19qvO65Aj740BA/
In-Reply-To	<2436927.QxtA20KIfX@PointedEars.de>
Cancel-Lock	sha1:g7c4Ty4iEoJcKVRhqBm80rpPcPE=
X-NNTP-Posting-Host	eJwFwQkBwDAIA0BL5Qm0coAM/xJ2BwuJSQ+EY7Hmwyrl0XzTPj1otd37FUnJsnMPhNr6UIgfNm0RqA==
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:27270

Show key headers only | View raw

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:

> Christoph M. Becker wrote:
> 
>> Denis McMahon wrote:
>>> I haven't tested the following code, but it might return a result object
>>> that either contains the results you want, garbage, or a single error
>>> attribute.
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Sorry it's not a class object, but I've never really grokked the whole
>>> emulate OOP with javascript using functions as classes thing[1].
>>
>> It appears that the function can be used as constructor function
> 
> No, it cannot.  It is syntactically invalid to begin with.

Indeed.  I had to replace instanceOf with instanceof (and a string
literal that was split due to Usenet posting) to be able to run the
function.  I did not go further.

>> and called with `new election([...])`, so all is well. ;)
> 
> It is a fundamental misconception that OOP requires classes.  You do _not_ 
> emulate OOP using functions as constructors in most ECMAScript 
> implementations; you *do* OOP, just a special kind of prototype-based OOP.

ACK.  However, neither the OP nor Denis seem to be really insterested in
such (and other) "subtleties", which caused me to post my reply which
was meant ironically.

Thanks, however, for clarifying the issue for other readers. :)

-- 
Christoph M. Becker

Thread

Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. Rahul Reddy <rahulreddy160@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 10:44 -0700
  Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2015-04-08 22:49 +0200
  Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-04-08 21:05 +0000
    Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-04-08 23:52 +0200
      Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2015-04-09 01:31 +0200
        Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. "Christoph M. Becker" <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2015-04-09 16:31 +0200
      Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2015-04-09 01:48 +0000
  Re: Javascript classes. Please take a look at my question. John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2015-04-09 09:24 +0100

csiph-web