Subj : Re: Creating classes/namespaces on the fly from existing functions?
To   : Shanti Rao
From : Brendan Eich
Date : Mon Jan 10 2005 03:04 pm

Shanti Rao wrote:
>> Now I do it like this:
>> var x=getLibrary("foo.js");
>>
>> and getLibrary returns an (module) object. (the newly created (module)
>> object is passed as this to the foo.js to allow the script to decide if
>> it still wants to pollute the global namespace or not)
>>
>> This gets quite close to real namespaces.
>>
>> Jens
>>
> 
> I like the idea of encapsulating library variables in thir own 
> namespace. An interpreter would have to have two functions, since some 
> code is intended to run inline:
> 
> f = getLibrary("foo.js")
> includeLibrary("bar.js")
> 
> With the former, there are a few minor glitches. Consider
> 
> js>f = {Foo: function() {this.message = 'Foo'}};

But why must getLibrary be implemented so as to use anonymous functions 
if "foo.js" contains named function declarations?

/be

> js>a = new f.Foo()
> [object Object]
> js>a.constructor.name
> 
> The last statement returns an empty string. Compare with
> 
> js>function Bar() {this.message='Bar'};
> js>b = new Bar
> [object Object]
> js>b.constructor.name
> Bar
> 
> Shanti
> 
> 
> 
>

.