Can we recognize Constructor Functions (was: custom event in IE)

From	Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Can we recognize Constructor Functions (was: custom event in IE)
Date	2017-01-15 23:39 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<o5h182$cvm$2@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <20170110215212.00003a50@gmail.com> <1747068.usQuhbGJ8B@PointedEars.de> <o5eal0$4ib$1@dont-email.me> <9a709fc2-325b-4280-98b8-1c0d5cb790cd@googlegroups.com> <1642042.tdWV9SEqCh@PointedEars.de>

Show all headers | View raw

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
> Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
>> Scott Sauyet wrote:

>>> `fn` cannot reasonably be used as a constructor function.
>>> So are there any clear criteria to make clear that a function *can* be
>>> used as a constructor?
>> 
>> That's where code-conventions come into play.
>> 
>> new Point(2,4)
>> 
>> vs.
>> 
>> new point(2,4)

> 
> Yes, but:
> 
> The fallacies here are to confuse native objects with host objects, and
> a straw man argument.  [ ... ]

I'm not sure where you're seeing fallacies.  If it's in the original 
thread, that's fine; I wasn't paying a great deal of attention, until a 
single sentence in one of your posts spurred an interesting question for 
me.  It it's in my response -- which, I apologize, I forgot to rename -- 
I can't see why, as all I really did was to ask questions.  If it's in 
Michael Haufe's response, while it didn't really answer the question I 
was asking, it certainly does not seem even slightly fallacious.

> You *can* tell whether *this* *object* can be called as a constructor in
> the way that is specified. [ ... ]

Ah, but I was inspired by your statement to ask a broader question.  Do 
you have any thoughts on that question?

  -- Scott

Thread

custom event in IE Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-10 12:08 +1100
  Re: custom event in IE Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-10 12:20 +1100
    Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-10 02:45 +0100
      Re: custom event in IE Andrew Poulos <ap_prog@hotmail.com> - 2017-01-10 15:32 +1100
        Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-10 12:53 +0100
          Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-11 08:25 +0100
        Re: custom event in IE James Kirk <noneya.invalid@gmail.com> - 2017-01-10 21:52 -0500
          Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-11 04:09 +0100
            Re: custom event in IE James Kirk <noneya.invalid@gmail.com> - 2017-01-11 21:31 -0500
              Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-12 14:22 +0100
            Re: custom event in IE Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2017-01-14 23:01 +0000
              Re: custom event in IE "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2017-01-15 09:51 -0800
                Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-15 22:37 +0100
                Can we recognize Constructor Functions (was: custom event in IE) Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2017-01-15 23:39 +0000
                Re: custom event in IE Scott Sauyet <scott@sauyet.com> - 2017-01-15 23:15 +0000
                Re: custom event in IE "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2017-01-15 22:36 -0800
                Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-16 12:54 +0100
                Re: custom event in IE "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2017-01-16 14:18 -0800
                Re: custom event in IE Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-01-17 00:24 +0100

csiph-web