well, yes, you are right at this point. Mark said, he uses much of typeof and sometimes instanceof for Array detection. So, his use case may be a good one for underscore. but if you just want this one single function, it is an overkill, but even then it's worth to look at its code and just take the picks you need, and use them. it's MIT
> Furthermore, underscore has a nasty history of not correctly matching native implementations is this a claim like: "don't use it, because it had bugs earlier"? huh? Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012 23:03:27 UTC+1 schrieb Rick Waldron: > > > > On Friday, December 28, 2012, greelgorke wrote: > >> look further, there is more than just isArray. AND underscore falls back >> to native implementations, if any present. and it's just it: same interface >> for every plattform. > > > Yes, I'm very aware of underscore, thank you. I don't believe in adding a > full on library for the sake of using a single function that language > already offers natively. Furthermore, underscore has a nasty history of not > correctly matching native implementations, so lucky you: same API, > different behaviour. > > The only platforms that don't support Array.isArray are old IEs. > > > Rick > > > >> Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012 22:31:28 UTC+1 schrieb Rick Waldron: >> >> >> >> On Friday, December 28, 2012, greelgorke wrote: >> >> psst.. i heard underscore have some cool tools for the typeof pain, like >> http://underscorejs.org/#**isArray <http://underscorejs.org/#isArray> >> >> >> *facepalm* >> >> Really? On a platform that supports Array.isArray built-in? >> >> Rick >> >> >> >> Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012 22:32:03 UTC+1 schrieb Mark Hahn: >> >> > what sort of program scenarios you've found yourself in where >> instanceof was the "go to" solution >> >> I use typeof a lot, but instanceof not so often. I sometimes use >> instanceof Array when I don't have a helper around for that. >> >> I've just started a module for use in node and the client that "fixes" >> these as much as possible. It is annoying when I get an error just >> because of lack of camelCasing. My mind isn't good at remembering >> minor things. >> >> Does anyone know how I could fix typeof in node? I can see how to do >> it in the client. Luckily I'm using coffeescript so making typeOf a >> function will be used like `typeOf x` and it will look the same as >> typeof `x`. >> >> > Completely irrelevant to the discussion... >> >> What is irrelevant? >> >> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Inline... >> > >> > >> > On Thursday, December 27, 2012, Mark Hahn wrote: >> >> >> >> Why not also allow readDir? It would cause no harm to do so. >> >> >> >> This isn't node, but what also bugs me is typeof and instanceof. I >> >> cringe every time I type them. >> > >> > >> > Completely irrelevant to the discussion... but you have my attention >> now—I'm >> > curious to know what sort of program scenarios you've found yourself in >> > where instanceof was the "go to" solution (but painful to use?), aside >> from >> > useful type checking (types as in "object types", not as in >> "data-types"). >> > If you want to know if x has Foo constructor in its prototype chain, >> > instanceof has you covered. >> > >> > Rick >> > >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM, David Habereder >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > That clears that up. Thanks. >> >> > >> >> > Am Donnerstag, 27. Dezember 2012 20:36:30 UTC+1 schrieb Matt >> Sergeant: >> >> >> >> >> >> I think you'll likely find where it isn't the case (such as >> readdir) >> >> >> the >> >> >> name comes from the POSIX function name. There's no readfile >> function >> >> >> in >> >> >> POSIX, but there is readdir(). The only other case seems to be >> >> >> readlink, >> >> >> which is the same issue. >> >> >> >> >> >> http://linux.die.net/man/2/**rea**ddir<http://linux.die.net/man/2/readdir> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://linux.die.net/man/2/**rea**dlink<http://linux.die.net/man/2/readlink> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 1:02 PM, David Habereder < >> [email protected]> >> >> >> wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Hi, >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I am quite new to node.js. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> As far as I can see the method names aren't very consistent. Take >> the >> >> >>> methods from File System for example: >> http://nodejs.org/api/fs.html >> >> >>> It is ".readFile" (Camelcase) >> >> >>> But it is ".readdir" (all lowercase) >> >> >>> >> >> >>> There are a few more such cases where I don't see a pattern when >> >> >>> camelcase is used and when not. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> You could say that this is absolutely irrelevant and you would be >> >> >>> right. >> >> >>> But it annoys me :-( >> >> >>> And it reminds me of PHP syntax garbage. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Is there any interest in getting all method names either camelcase >> or >> >> > >> >> -- Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nodejs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
