[dojo-contributors] dojo.Stateful - long live r23032!
rgill at altoviso.com
Thu Mar 10 17:31:14 EST 2011
On Thursday 10 March 2011 13:54:30 ben hockey wrote:
> partial response inline
> On 3/10/2011 4:16 PM, Rawld Gill wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 March 2011 06:31:47 Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:48 PM, Bill Keese<bill at dojotoolkit.org> wrote:
> >>> We didn't agree to this at the meeting (or at any other time).
> >> <snip/>
> >> Correct, its MO -- tautologically, I disagree with anyone who
> >> disagrees with me on something as fundamental as this :-)
> > Why is it fundamental? Because you say so?
> > Let's try some engineering reasoning on this thread for a moment:
> > 1. The documentation for dojo.stateful .watch says:
> > "Watches a property for changes"
> > and
> > "The function to execute when the property changes."
> > So, currently, dojo.stateful.watch's specification (the docs) and
> > implementation (the code) are inconsistent.
> actually, this is not correct. if you look at the current state of
> dojo.stateful.watch, it notifies on all calls to set. hence the subject
> line of this thread. it was accidentally reverted to this behavior as
> part of r23032.
and code at
are inconsistent. So what are you saying is not correct? My observation? The
docs? The code?
> > 4. APIs like stateful are quite common place. I've seen them in many
> > object systems in many languages. I'm fairly certain that most do not
> > signal on no- ops (e.g., http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-
> > us/library/ms692638%28v=VS.85%29.aspx)
> /watch notifies all watchers any time the property is set regardless of a
> change in value.
OK. But at least your example says it signals on set() application (not
More information about the dojo-contributors