On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:

>
> On Jun 24, 2013, at 8:42 AM, Jason Orendorff wrote:
>
> > According to the January 30 meeting notes, Array.from is getting
> > optional map functionality.[1]
> >
> > This is motivated by the following example:
> >
> >    class V extends Array {
> >        constructor(...args) {
> >            super(...args);
> >        }
> >    }
> >
> >    var v, m;
> >    v = new V(1, 2, 3);
> >    m = v.map(val => val * 2);
> >    console.log( m instanceof V ); // false :(
> >
> > Of course changing Array.from doesn't fix this; v.map() still returns
> > an Array, same as before. And there was already an easy workaround:
> >    m = V.from(v.map(val => val * 2));
>
> The issues (and discussion) is more complex then the above indicates.
>
> The root issue concerns what should Array producing methods such as Map
> produce when used in an Array subclass. Should the result be an Array
> instance (as it currently is in ES5) or should it be a new instance of the
> subclass.  If the latter, how is the actual subclass determined.
>

If the `map` method is inherited and is called directly on the instance of
the inherited class, then probably it's more logical to return the instance
of the same inheriting class (i.e. the V).

To answer your question how the determination of the subclass should happen
-- first need to ask what is the [[NativeBrand]] says for "v" instance? Is
it still "NativeArray" (shouldn't be IMO, will clarify in the spec later)?

Can you use the [[NativeBrand]] check or at very least `constrcutor`
property check (which though, not that safe maybe). Will it actually make
sense to set the [[NativeBrand]] to the name of the class?

if (Array.isArray(this)) {
  var result = [];
} else {
  var result = new this.constructor(<somehow_get_the_default_args>?);
}

But again there is an issue with determination of the default arguments of
the constructor, though can fallback to defaults.

Dmitry
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20130624/08e5e2f0/attachment.html>

On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen at wirfs-brock.com>wrote:

> The issues (and discussion) is more complex then the above indicates.
>
> The root issue concerns what should Array producing methods such as Map
> produce when used in an Array subclass. Should the result be an Array
> instance (as it currently is in ES5) or should it be a new instance of the
> subclass.  If the latter, how is the actual subclass determined.

If the `map` method is inherited and is called directly on the instance of
the inherited class, then probably it's more logical to return the instance
of the same inheriting class (i.e. the V).

To answer your question how the determination of the subclass should happen
-- first need to ask what is the [[NativeBrand]] says for "v" instance? Is
it still "NativeArray" (shouldn't be IMO, will clarify in the spec later)?

Can you use the [[NativeBrand]] check or at very least `constrcutor`
property check (which though, not that safe maybe). Will it actually make
sense to set the [[NativeBrand]] to the name of the class?

```js
if (Array.isArray(this)) {
  var result = [];
} else {
  var result = new this.constructor(<somehow_get_the_default_args>?);
}
```

But again there is an issue with determination of the default arguments of
the constructor, though can fallback to defaults.