Any interest in a "formatter" feature? and a bug... about backbone.getters.setters HOT 5 CLOSED

for (attr in _(attrs).keys()) {} is wrong! I can't figure out a clever shorthand, but this works:

for (var attr in attrs) {
  if ( ! attrs.hasOwnProperty(attr) )
    continue;
  // ...
}

from backbone.getters.setters.

Thanks for all the input.

1. The prototyping bug. can you include a scenario where the problem can be seen? In most cases, the backbone API for the "key" argument is a javascript object only (JSON) or a single key. Note that the original backbone source code includes the same kind of enumeration over the "attrs" variable inside the original "set" method.

However, there are bugs in the code that I haven't pushed into the repo yet, mainly not declaring "attrs", "attr" with a "var" before them. Will update this soon.

2. The "formatter feature". I see the need for a more versatile getter method, but I think this can be done in a simpler way.

One option that comes to mind is getting the "datetime" Date object and manipulating it using external methods. I think the date methods should be implemented on the Date object itself (check out date.js for a better javascript Date object).

For other tasks requiring methods on the backbone object, Another option is having multiple getter methods, one for each need (might not be suitable for the date-format task, but pretty useful for others): "timedate" and "timedateHHMMSS".

3. The raw-get function is good, but this might lead developers into calling this directly on the object and therefore "jumping over" the getter method. The idea is to have all get calls redirected into one getter method (I understand anyone can just call Backbone.Model.prototype.set.call but making this more accessible is not always recommended).

What do you think? I'm trying to favor small and simple code-base over more features.

from backbone.getters.setters.

The prototyping bug is for people who add methods to Object.prototype. I don't do that, but there are still those masochists who use Prototype.

backbone and underscore sometimes (not always!) use for ( prop in attars ) {}, but they also use _.has (a synonym for Object.hasOwnProperty), and the times they use one or the other depend on whether they want all the attributes of the object or just the "keys" (case in point: they _.keys function uses _.has).

In this case, you only want the "setter-keys", not Object.prototype methods AND keys.

Next up. Actually, rawget was specifically to bypass the getters/setters! So yeah, if you don't want a way to do that then drop 'em, for sure.

The formatter feature seems useful to me, I'm not sure how it could get "simpler", I'm just passing the format along to the getter/setter. I won't try too hard to convince you. It's something I got used to in my company's ORM (we call 'em "formatters", and there's a whole system for them). I might even add this feature in my fork.

I think they makes things short and sweet, though it is a little magic...

Formatter.register('$', function(value) { return '$' + value; });
event.cost('$')  // => '$5.00'

Up to you! Except the Object.prototype thing... 😉

from backbone.getters.setters.

It looks like using model.toJSON() passing getters

from backbone.getters.setters.

As I said, I'm trying to favor small and simple code-base over more features.

from backbone.getters.setters.