Dmitry Soshnikov (2013-11-27T22:49:52.000Z)
domenic at domenicdenicola.com (2013-12-03T03:06:04.842Z)
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.rick at gmail.com>wrote: > # Nov 20 Meeting Notes > > > > #### Consensus/Resolution > > - Remove Object.mixin > - "toMethod()" wins -- debate about argument order > > > > Function.prototype.toMethod(home[, mname]) > > > A small observation: the toMethod is cool, and Allen recently showed an example of how it can be applied: ```js (function(){super()})() //throws because unbound super (function(){super()}).toMethod(Array.prototype,"toString").call([])///ok ``` The only thing I'm worried (and that Mark mentioned), is that the super-inheritance is tightly related to the class-based sugar. While the approach above again exposes the prototypes implementation detail via this `.prototype` stuff. Probably should be two: ```js .toMethod(Array, 'toString'); // to (instance/proto) method .toStaticMethod(Array, 'toString'); // constructor's method ``` The former, as mentioned, works with the `.prototype` not exposing this detail to the user-level code.