Merge branch 'master' into doc/master

TODO

@@ -8,6 +8,9 @@
     - Disallow member redeclaration in definition
     - Permit binding on class methods
     - Provide ability to free class from memory (class data stored in internal vars)
+    - Move tests to directly test propobj
+      - Was never done after refactoring. It's tested as a consequence of being
+        used in the class module.
 
   Member Keywords
     - Restrictions; throw exceptions when unknown keywords are used

lib/class.js

@@ -39,10 +39,23 @@ var class_meta = {};
 /**
  * Stores class instance visibility object
  *
- * For each instance id, an object exists that contains the private and
+ * An entry in this table exists for each instance, with the instance id (iid)
- * protected members.
+ * as the key. For each instance, there is always a base. The base will contain
+ * a proxy to the public members on the instance itself. The base will also
+ * contain all protected members.
  *
- * @type {Object.<number, Object>}
+ * Atop the base object is a private member object, with the base as its
+ * prototype. There exists a private member object for the instance itself and
+ * one for each supertype. This is stored by the class id (cid) as the key. This
+ * permits the private member object associated with the class of the method
+ * call to be bound to that method. For example, if a parent method is called,
+ * that call must be invoked in the context of the parent, so the private
+ * members of the parent must be made available.
+ *
+ * The resulting structure looks something like this:
+ *   class_instance = { iid: { cid: {} } }
+ *
+ * @type {Object.<number, Object<number, Object>>}
  */
 var class_instance = {};
 

lib/propobj.js

@@ -46,12 +46,17 @@ var util = require( './util' ),
  */
 exports.setup = function( dest, properties, methods )
 {
+    var obj = dest;
+
     // this constructor is an extra layer atop of the destination object, which
     // will contain the private methods
-    var obj_ctor = function() {};
+    if ( defprop )
-    obj_ctor.prototype = dest;
+    {
+        var obj_ctor = function() {};
+        obj_ctor.prototype = dest;
 
-    var obj = new obj_ctor();
+        obj = new obj_ctor();
+    }
 
     // initialize each of the properties for this instance to
     // ensure we're not sharing references to prototype values

test/test-class-visibility.js

@@ -54,6 +54,15 @@ var common  = require( './common' ),
         },
 
 
+        /**
+         * Does the same as the above, but we won't override this one
+         */
+        'public nonOverrideGetProp': function( name )
+        {
+            return this[ name ];
+        },
+
+
         /**
          * Allows us to set a value from within the class
          */
@@ -116,6 +125,9 @@ var common  = require( './common' ),
             // protected/private properties (for testing purposes)
             return this[ name ];
         },
+
+
+        'private myOwnPrivateFoo': function() {},
     }),
     sub_foo = SubFoo(),
 
@@ -442,3 +454,52 @@ var common  = require( './common' ),
     );
 } )();
 
+
+/**
+ * When a parent method is invoked, the parent should not be given access to the
+ * private members of the invoking subtype. Why?
+ *
+ * This is not a matter of whether or not this is possible to do. In fact it's
+ * relatively simple to implement. The issue is whether or not it makes sense.
+ * Consider a compiled language. Let's say Foo and SubFoo (as defined in this
+ * test case) were written in C++. Should Foo have access to a private property
+ * on SubFoo when it is overridden?
+ *
+ * No - that doesn't make sense. The private member is not a member of Foo and
+ * therefore Foo would fail to even compile. Alright, but we don't have such a
+ * restriction in our case. So why not implement it?
+ *
+ * Proponents of such an implementation are likely thinking of the act of
+ * inheriting methods as a copy/paste type of scenario. If we inherit public
+ * method baz(), and it were a copy/paste type of situation, then surely baz()
+ * would have access to all of SubFoo's private members. But that is not the
+ * case. Should baz() be defined as a member of Foo, then its scope is
+ * restricted to Foo and its supertypes. That is not how OO works. It is /not/
+ * copy/paste. It is inheriting functionality.
+ */
+( function testParentsShouldNotHaveAccessToPrivateMembersOfSubtypes()
+{
+    // browsers that do not support the property proxy will not support
+    // encapsulating properties
+    if ( !( propobj.supportsPropProxy() ) )
+    {
+        return;
+    }
+
+    // property
+    assert.equal(
+        sub_foo.nonOverrideGetProp( '_pfoo' ),
+        undefined,
+        "Parent should not have access to private properties of subtype when " +
+            "a parent method is invoked"
+    );
+
+    // member
+    assert.equal(
+        sub_foo.nonOverrideGetProp( '_myOwnPrivateFoo' ),
+        undefined,
+        "Parent should not have access to private methods of subtype when " +
+            "a parent method is invoked"
+    );
+} )();
+

test/test-combine-pre-es5.js

@@ -0,0 +1,77 @@
+/**
+ * Tests combined file, attempting to emulate a pre-ECMAScript5 environment.
+ * This will ensure fallbacks will work properly on older browsers, such as IE6.
+ *
+ * This is /not/ an alternative to running the test suite in the browser of your
+ * choice. It is intended to catch errors early, to ensure bugs are not
+ * committed between browser tests.
+ *
+ *  Copyright (C) 2010 Mike Gerwitz
+ *
+ *  This file is part of ease.js.
+ *
+ *  ease.js is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the
+ *  terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published by the Free
+ *  Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or (at your option)
+ *  any later version.
+ *
+ *  This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but WITHOUT
+ *  ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of MERCHANTABILITY or
+ *  FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the GNU Lesser General Public License
+ *  for more details.
+ *
+ *  You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
+ *  along with this program.  If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
+ *
+ * @author  Mike Gerwitz
+ * @package test
+ */
+
+var common  = require( './common' ),
+    assert  = require( 'assert' ),
+    Class   = common.require( 'class' ),
+    Script  = process.binding( 'evals' ).Script,
+
+    // sandbox in which combined script will be run
+    sandbox = {
+        // stub document.write() so we don't blow up
+        document: { write: function() {} },
+    };
+
+
+var file = 'ease-full.js';
+
+// attempt to read the combined file
+try
+{
+    var data = require( 'fs' )
+        .readFileSync( ( __dirname + '/../build/' + file ), 'ascii' );
+}
+catch ( e )
+{
+    // if the file doesn't exit, just skip the test
+    console.log(
+        "Combined file not found. Test skipped. Please run `make combined`."
+    );
+    process.exit( 0 );
+}
+
+// Let's take this bitch back in time (this is not a complete list, but
+// satisfies what we need).
+//
+// It is important to note that we prepend this to the script that we'll be
+// executing, because the script will be executed within a new scope. Any
+// clobbering we do in our scope will not affect it, nor will any clobbering we
+// do to it affect us.
+data = "delete Object.defineProperty;" +
+    "delete Array.prototype.forEach;" +
+    data
+;
+
+// run the script (if this fails to compile, the generated code is invalid)
+var cmb_script = new Script( data );
+cmb_script.runInNewContext( sandbox );
+
+// cross your fingers
+sandbox.easejs.runTests();
+

tools/combine

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ if [ "$INC_TEST" ]; then
         \) \
         -exec basename {} \; \
         | sort \
-        | grep -v 'test-\(combine\|index\).js' \
+        | grep -v 'test-\(combine\(-pre-es5\)\?\|index\).js' \
     )
 
     # include test combine template