JS::Object inherits BasicObject #541
Conversation
To enable calling the JavaScript send method.
|
|
||
| # I don't know why, but I can't define the respond_to? method in refinements. | ||
| # I'm defining it here instead. | ||
| [:nil?, :is_a?, :raise, :respond_to?].each do |method| |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Given that JS objects unlikely define methods suffixed with ?, it makes sense to me to define nil?, is_a?, and respond_to? for convenience and better compatibility with libraries without BasicObject support.
One question, where do we use raise?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see, it seems that there is no need to consider collisions of methods suffixed with ?.
We raise an exception when the method call fails.
ruby.wasm/packages/gems/js/lib/js.rb
Lines 254 to 255 in 4c12c77
| require 'pp' | ||
| module JsObjectTestable | ||
| refine JS::Object do | ||
| [:object_id, :pretty_inspect].each do |method| |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If those definitions are just for testing, it might be better to fix testing libraries in the long term. I just opened a test-unit fix for BasicObject support. test-unit/test-unit#262
But it's fine for now. Could you add FIXME comments mentioning the fix PR and potential future fix?
The original motivation was to make it easier to call the JavaScript
WebSocket#sendmethod.To achieve this, the following three methods were considered.
Object#sendmethodObject#sendmethodObjectclassI was attracted by the fact that it clearly defines the role of the
JS::Objectclass as a class that wraps JavaScript objects. I adopted the third method.You can see past challenges at #509.