Comments on: Implementing super in JavaScript

By: mitchell

mitchell — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:42:40 +0000

Thanks for the reply and for the one over on my post. I was going to make sure you know I replied to the side effect concern and your other question there. I’m ignorant of what problems can be caused by side effects so I just asked for more info if you have it.

By: jonathanfine

jonathanfine — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 05:53:59 +0000

@mitchell:
Here’s a problem. The following code usually has a side effect.

backup = this[prop]; delete this[prop]; this[prop] = backup;

By: mitchell

mitchell — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 22:32:14 +0000

I enjoyed reading over this. Allow me to suggest a simpler way that you yourself hinted at in this paragraph:

We wish to call the method A.getA, but with the special this object being the object c. If it were not for C have the spoiler method C.getA, we could write c.getA() to call A.getA with this being c. But the spoiler is there, so we have to do something else.

If the 'spoiler' method is in the way, why not just move it out of the way for moment? Like so:

var backup = c.getA;
delete c.getA;
c.getA(); //the 'super' call
c.getA = backup;

What do you think? Just yesterday I posted about this topic on my fledgling blog. I more or less summed it up here but check it out the full version if you feel inclined.