> Name clashes aren't an issue, since MethodChain doesn't apply any
> special meaning to the method names it knows; the limitation is
> because JavaScript doesn't allow you to modify property lookup
> behavior. And since we can make the chain object callable, we don't
> need "fire" or "toFunction
On Sun, Jul 20, 2008 at 1:01 AM, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The methods are a problem IMHO. You can't add an own method/function with
> the name `fire()` or `toFunction()`. `MethodChain` has to know all
> functions/methods in advance. You can add the methods of whole c
On Jul 20, 12:01 am, Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The methods are a problem IMHO. You can't add an own method/function with
> the name `fire()` or `toFunction()`. `MethodChain` has to know all
> functions/methods in advance. You can add the methods of whole classes at
>
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 13:57:33 -0700, bearophileHUGS wrote:
> Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch:
>> What's called `MethodChain` there seems to be function composition in
>> functional languages. Maybe `functools` could grow a `compose()` function.
>
> To me it looks like a quite more "refined" thing, it's
Marc 'BlackJack' Rintsch:
> What's called `MethodChain` there seems to be function composition in
> functional languages. Maybe `functools` could grow a `compose()` function.
To me it looks like a quite more "refined" thing, it's an object, it
has some special methods, etc. I think it's not too m
On Sat, 19 Jul 2008 08:55:23 -0700, bearophileHUGS wrote:
> Found from Reddit, it's for e ECMA(Java)Script, but something similar
> may be useful for Python too:
>
> http://jsclass.jcoglan.com/methodchain.html
> http://blog.jcoglan.com/2008/07/16/where-did-all-my-code-go-using-ojay-chains-to-expr
