Re:Ractive.js
by emn13 on Wednesday July 24, 2013 @06:12PM
(#6099438)
If getters/setters aren't available, I still vastly prefer plain functions (e.g. knockout) to the stringized setter.
I mean, why would
model.set('someProp', 'someVal');
x = model.get('someProp');
be better than
model.someProp('someVal');
x = model.someProp();
And the second one is likely to perform better, allows better tooling support (nice to have), is shorter, and allows representing a property as a concept in itself `model.someProp`. You can still access a property with a variable name in the (unusual) case you need to.
If you really insist on explicit set/get, then you can still have...
model.someProp.set('someVal');
x = model.someProp.get();
Which still has no downside I can think of, and since this is JS, if you have a variable prop name, you can fall back to...
I mean, why would
be better than And the second one is likely to perform better, allows better tooling support (nice to have), is shorter, and allows representing a property as a concept in itself `model.someProp`. You can still access a property with a variable name in the (unusual) case you need to.If you really insist on explicit set/get, then you can still have...
Which still has no downside I can think of, and since this is JS, if you have a variable prop name, you can fall back to...Pretty please, will the unnecessary strings die?