Object.prototype.inspect ?

Tobie Langel tobie.langel at gmail.com
Thu Mar 12 14:25:49 PDT 2009


On Mar 12, 2009, at 21:54 , P T Withington wrote:

> I think we are a long way from needing serialize/deserialize  
> arbitrary Objects.  Having JSON should suffice.

I agree.

> Since my users are programming in a language above Javascript, I'm  
> starting to change the representation to be more like the high-level  
> language they write in, rather than display the Javascript "assembly  
> language".)

This seems similar to the needs of the objective-j folks (as expressed  
in the "name property for built-in functions??" thread).

> But, I would very much like to see a standard way to discover an  
> Object's constructor, and a way to enumerate _all_ the properties of  
> an object.

Again, I'm very interested in the former. And doing away with the  
Object.prototype.toString.call(obj) trick for built-in types would be  
a good thing.

Could we possibly imagine having a non-[[Writable]] and non- 
[[Configurable]] 'name' property of built-in constructors whose value  
would be [[Class]] ?

Tobie




More information about the Es-discuss mailing list