Is it not well to extend Object.prototype derictly?

[jidixuelang]

As I know,it's not well to extend Object.prototype derictly.
In the Prototype(JS Framewoke),there is no extend Object.prototype.
It only add some static method for Object class.
I want to konw the reason.Who can give me some advise!?

[Martin Honnen]

ji*********@gmail.com wrote:

As I know,it's not well to extend Object.prototype derictly.
In the Prototype(JS Framewoke),there is no extend Object.prototype.
It only add some static method for Object class.
I want to konw the reason.Who can give me some advise!?

for..in enumeration will enumerate the properties added to
Object.prototype, try e.g.

Object.prototype.foo = function () { };
for (var propertyName in { bar: 1}) {
alert(propertyName);
}

and it will alert 'foo' as well as 'bar'.

--

Martin Honnen
http://JavaScript.FAQTs.com/

[dhtmlkitchen]

On Aug 12, 7:08 am, Martin Honnen <[e-mail]:

[e-mail] wrote:

As I know,it's not well to extend Object.prototype derictly.
In the Prototype(JS Framewoke),there is no extend Object.prototype.
It only add some static method for Object class.
I want to konw the reason.Who can give me some advise!?

for..in enumeration will enumerate the properties added to
Object.prototype, try e.g.

Object.prototype.foo = function () { };
for (var propertyName in { bar: 1}) {
alert(propertyName);

}

and it will alert 'foo' as well as 'bar'.

This is my thinking.

Google: Object.prototype is verboten!

Until ECMAScript provides access to the DontEnum flag,
Object.prototype should not be modified.

Adding a static property to Object constructor function would not be
harmful.

Object.poop = "hearin aid umbrella";

But that would be fairly useless.