kitcambridge

5 ms·

1.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
Fixed. Thank you!
2.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
Fixed. Thanks for the heads-up!
3.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
I, too, would love to see comments officially supported in the next iteration of the JSON standard...IIRC, Crockford removed them to make JSON a valid YAML subset. For what it's worth, I've created a fork of Kyle Simpson's `JSON.minify` pro
4.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
That's correct. Currently, Firefox is the only browser that implements the JSON routines exactly as described in the spec (parsing since version 5.0, and serializing since 6.0)...others deviate in one or more ways. It's not so much of a con
5.
JSON 3: A modern JSON polyfill compatible with nearly all JavaScript platforms.(bestiejs.github.com)
41 points by kitcambridge 15y ago|28 comments
6.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
Most of the additional aliases are taken directly from Ruby's `Enumerable` module (though both `fold` and `reduce` are common names for that function; not sure why Ruby called it `inject`), but I definitely agree. One name should be suffici
7.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
Normalizing `for...in` iteration in Underscore has actually been discussed before...the consensus was that it wasn't worthwhile to overload `_.each`, and that the use of objects as hashes in JavaScript was inherently broken. As such, Maddy
8.
by kitcambridge 15y ago
They're not quite the same. Underscore is primarily for working with arrays and index-based collections, not objects. Furthermore, it doesn't normalize common iteration bugs, such as the JScript `[[DontEnum]]` bug, Safari 2 property shadowi
9.
Maddy 0.3.0, a functional object operations library(kitcambridge.github.com)
12 points by kitcambridge 15y ago|7 comments