flynx/object.js
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/flynx/object.js.git synced 2025-10-29 18:40:08 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

tweaking docs...

Browse Source 
Signed-off-by: Alex A. Naanou <alex.nanou@gmail.com>
This commit is contained in:
Alex A. Naanou 2020-05-06 03:15:39 +03:00
parent 7f8f180a89
commit ead4ed4868
1 changed files with 21 additions and 7 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

28
README.md
View File

@ -8,7 +8,8 @@ object model and interfaces.
This is an alternative to the ES6 `class` syntax in JavaScript and provides This is an alternative to the ES6 `class` syntax in JavaScript and provides
several advantages: several advantages:
- Simple way to define instance and "class" methods, properties and attributes, - Simple way to define instance and "class" (constructor) methods,
properties and attributes,
- Uniform and minimalistic definition syntax based on basic JavaScript - Uniform and minimalistic definition syntax based on basic JavaScript
object syntax, no special cases, special syntax or _"the same but slightly object syntax, no special cases, special syntax or _"the same but slightly
different"_ ways to do things, different"_ ways to do things,
@ -17,6 +18,8 @@ several advantages:
and `.__init__(..)` methods) and `.__init__(..)` methods)
- Simple way to define callable instances (including a-la _Python's_ - Simple way to define callable instances (including a-la _Python's_
`.__call__(..)`) `.__call__(..)`)
- produces fully introspectable constructors/instances, i.e. no direct
way to define "private" attributes or methods.
- Less restrictive: - Less restrictive:
- `new` is optional - `new` is optional
- all input components are reusable - all input components are reusable
@ -26,20 +29,23 @@ Disadvantages compared to the `class` syntax:
- No _syntactic sugar_ - No _syntactic sugar_
- Slightly more complicated calling of `parent` (_super_) methods - Slightly more complicated calling of `parent` (_super_) methods
Here is a basic comparison:
<table border="0"> <table border="0">
<tr valign="top"> <tr valign="top">
<td width="50%" style="border:none;"> <td width="50%">
_object.js_ _object.js_
```javascript ```javascript
var Base = object.Constructor('X', Array, { var L = object.Constructor('L', Array, {
constructor_attr: 'constructor', constructor_attr: 'constructor',
method: function(){ method: function(){
return 'constructor' return 'constructor'
}, },
}, { }, {
// prototype attribute... // prototype attribute (inherited)...
attr: 'prototype', attr: 'prototype',
get prop(){ get prop(){
@ -51,19 +57,24 @@ var Base = object.Constructor('X', Array, {
}) })
``` ```
- Clear separation of constructor and `.prototype` data:
- First block (optional) is merged with constructor
- Second block is the `.prototype`
- no direct way to define "private"
</td> </td>
<td style="border:none;"> <td>
_ES6_ _ES6_
```javascript ```javascript
class X extends Array { class L extends Array {
static constructor_attr = 'class' static constructor_attr = 'class'
static method(){ static method(){
return 'class' return 'class'
} }
// instance attribute with default value... // instance attribute (copied)...
attr = 'instance' attr = 'instance'
get prop(){ get prop(){
@ -76,12 +87,15 @@ class X extends Array {
} }
} }
``` ```
- `static` and instance definitions are mixed within the body,
- `.attr` is copied to every instance
</td> </td>
</tr> </tr>
</table> </table>
## Contents ## Contents
- [object.js](#objectjs) - [object.js](#objectjs)
- [Contents](#contents) - [Contents](#contents)