Hacker News Reader

Comment by Autre | Hacker News Reader

Yeah, it gets really hairy, really quickly.

Beyond the need for calling the constructor (which I'm currently viewing it as an unnecessary hidrance [objects are already initialized]), Object.getPrototypeOf may provide a way out - but maybe not the way you intended. Have you considered it?

View on HN

    Object.getPrototypeOf(Child).constructor.apply(this, arguments);

Works, but is even more verbose. However if you use Object.getPrototypeOf on this you fail the recursive problem in nest super calls. Read the stackoverflow euestion

I was deliberately excluding the constructor situation. I should have made that clearer in my previous comment. I think the way out of the constructor mess is not to require them at all.

I do think the Object.getPrototypeOf approach is feasible for methods.

the method fails for the exact same reason.

If a single method calls a super method and that method calls another super method then it fails.

    Object.getPrototypeOf(this).method

Always have one value and only one value, calling it more then once leads to infinite recursion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com