[dojo-contributors] dojo.lang.inherits

Paul Sowden paul at idontsmoke.co.uk
Wed Apr 5 19:12:52 EDT 2006

OK, I'm sorry, but I'm reposting this in a new thread, please can you  
configure your mail client properly sjmiles, so that new emails are  
not sent with incorrect In-Reply-To and References headers.

On 5 Apr 2006, at 23:51, Scott J. Miles wrote:

At the Dojo meeting today (4/5/2006), dojo.inherits came up and we  
agreed to
open up the discussion to the general contribs list.

There are two (arguable) faults in the dojo.inherits implementation:

1. invoking super class methods is wordy and inconvenient.
2. there is no separation between constructor initialization and  

There is general agreement that we want to 'let JS be JS'.

With regard to (2), my personal opinion is that JS doesn't have an  
axe to
grind with respect to initialization, and there is nothing un-JS about
supporting a systemic instance initialization function (that is to  
say, a
standard way of specifying an instance initializer).

Alex seemed right-away to have an idea of how tweak dojo.inherits to add
such a feature (yay). We briefly discussed adding additional  
parameters to
inherits vs. a key-word style signature. I prefer the former, but  
there was
no general agreement.

There was some talk about the term 'inherits' implying a non-JS  
idiom, but
this is not a problem IMO. Any suggestions for new nomenclature are

Re (1), nobody seemed to have a handle on how to make calling
inherited/parent/base-class methods easier. Morris has developed his own
inheritence system that may provide a solution.

Thanks for listening. :)

Scott J. Miles
TurboAjax Group

More information about the dojo-contributors mailing list