扩展Object.prototype JavaScript [英] Extending Object.prototype JavaScript

问题描述

我不是在问这是否合适：

  Object.prototype.method = function（）{}; 
  

这几乎被所有人认为是邪恶，考虑到它搞砸了 for（var i in obj）。

真实问题

忽略

• 不称职的浏览器（不支持的浏览器 Object.defineProperty ）


• 财产碰撞或覆盖的可能性

假设你有一些令人难以置信有用的方法，这被认为是错误的/不道德的吗？

  Object.defineProperty（Object.prototype，'methodOnSteriods'， {
 value：function（）{/ *制作早餐，解决世界和平，取出垃圾* /}，
可写：true，
可配置：true，
 enumerable：false 
}）; 
  

如果您认为上述内容是不道德的，为什么他们甚至会首先实现该功能？

解决方案

我认为如果它适用于你的目标环境就好了。

<另外我认为原型扩展偏执狂被夸大了。只要您使用 hasOwnProperty（）就像一个优秀的开发人员一样，这一切都很好。最糟糕的情况是，您在其他地方重载该属性并丢失该方法。但如果你这样做，那就是你自己的错。

I am not asking if this is okay:

Object.prototype.method = function(){};

This is deemed evil by pretty much everyone, considering it messes up for(var i in obj).

The Real Question

Ignoring

• Incompetent browsers(browsers that don't support Object.defineProperty)
• Potential for property collision or overriding

Assuming you have some incredibly useful method, is this considered wrong/unethical?

Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, 'methodOnSteriods',{
  value: function(){ /* Makes breakfast, solves world peace, takes out trash */ },
  writable: true,
  configurable: true,
  enumerable: false
});

If you believe the above is unethical, why would they even implement the feature in the first place?

解决方案

I think it's fine if it works in your target environment.

Also I think prototype extension paranoia is overblown. As long as you use hasOwnProperty() like a good developer that it's all fine. Worst case, you overload that property elsewhere and lose the method. But that's your own fault if you do that.

这篇关于扩展Object.prototype JavaScript的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！