Rails spinoffs - Sep 2006 - Enumerable.inGroupsOf() should fill up with undefined instead of null?

Hi,

I cannot add comments to the bugtracker, it seems, so here we go:

There is this new method for Enumerables:

[1,2,3,4,5].inGroupsOf(3)       -> [[1,2,3],[4,5,null]]

To me, null is something explicitly set by the user / developer to "no
value, not applicable", whereas undefined means "this value was not
set explicitly at all".

So I wonder, if undefined would be the better default value to
indicate "not part of the initial dataset".

Bye,
  Martin

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Martin Bialasinski a écrit :
> [1,2,3,4,5].inGroupsOf(3)       -> [[1,2,3],[4,5,null]]
> 
> To me, null is something explicitly set by the user / developer to "no
> value, not applicable", whereas undefined means "this value was
not
> set explicitly at all".
I do believe the latter values ARE undefined.  What you *see* in the
text representation is a result of a pending bug in Object.inspect, that
displays undefined''s as null''s.

See http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/5941

-- 
Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD
tdd-x+CfDp/qHev2eFz/2MeuCQ@public.gmane.org

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD
<tdd-x+CfDp/qHev2eFz/2MeuCQ@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> I do believe the latter values ARE undefined.  What you *see* in the
> text representation is a result of a pending bug in Object.inspect, that
> displays undefined''s as null''s.
They are null alright:

  inGroupsOf: function(number, fillWith) {
  	  	       fillWith = fillWith || null;

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

hmm-- i''ve modelled it after the rails ruby extension[1].

Wikipedia tells us in a somewhat confusing article (no idea if  
they''re right) [2].
"In Ruby, the designation is called nil."

Note that the german version of the article is much clearer and  
mentions the
synonymity of null and nil explicitly.

So null in JavaScript should be equal to nil in Ruby.

So confused,
Thomas

[1] http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2006/3/1/new-in-rails-enumerable- 
group_by-and-array-in_groups_of
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Null_%28computer%29


Am 22.09.2006 um 15:22 schrieb Martin Bialasinski:
>
> Hi,
>
> I cannot add comments to the bugtracker, it seems, so here we go:
>
> There is this new method for Enumerables:
>
> [1,2,3,4,5].inGroupsOf(3)       -> [[1,2,3],[4,5,null]]
>
> To me, null is something explicitly set by the user / developer to "no
> value, not applicable", whereas undefined means "this value was
not
> set explicitly at all".
>
> So I wonder, if undefined would be the better default value to
> indicate "not part of the initial dataset".
>
> Bye,
>   Martin
>
> >
--
Thomas Fuchs
wollzelle

http://www.wollzelle.com

questentier on AIM
madrobby on irc.freenode.net

http://www.fluxiom.com :: online digital asset management
http://script.aculo.us :: Web 2.0 JavaScript
http://mir.aculo.us :: Where no web developer has gone before





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Am 22.09.2006 um 15:22 schrieb Martin Bialasinski:
> I cannot add comments to the bugtracker, it seems, so here we go:
Are you logged in? This is required now (spam-fighting).

--
Thomas Fuchs
wollzelle

http://www.wollzelle.com

questentier on AIM
madrobby on irc.freenode.net

http://www.fluxiom.com :: online digital asset management
http://script.aculo.us :: Web 2.0 JavaScript
http://mir.aculo.us :: Where no web developer has gone before





--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Thomas Fuchs <t.fuchs-moWQItti3gBl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
> hmm-- i''ve modelled it after the rails ruby extension[1].
Which uses nil.
> Note that the german version of the article is much clearer and
> mentions the synonymity of null and nil explicitly.
I believe the english version has some good points, see below.
> So null in JavaScript should be equal to nil in Ruby.
There are reasons to say nil in Ruby == undefined in Javascript.

The Wikipedia article distinguishes between two meanings:

Quote: Null is a special value for a pointer (or other kind of object
reference) used to signify that the pointer intentionally does not
have a target. [...] Some languages use other nomenclature for such a
pointer, e.g., nil, undefined, void reference, etc.

=> undefined in Javascript, nil in Ruby

Quote: In many disciplines, the concept of null allows a three-valued
logic, with null indicating "unknown value".

=> null in Javascript. What about Ruby, does it have something similar?

Javascript supports both concepts with null and undefined
respectively. Using undefined instead of null makes sure, that you can
have an array with members using this three-valued logic.

Furthermore: "var foo;" depicts a variable that does not have a value.
foo is undefined, not null. And I believe this is what the filler
elements are. Array members that do not have a value (that are
undefined), because they were not part of the original array.

Of cause, you can do arr[3] = undefined;, but still: choosing between
null and undefined, undefined seems to carry the meaning better than
null.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

null is a value directly assignable to a variable. "undefined" is a
string
represntation of a javascript type.

var foo;

alert(foo == null); // true
alert(typeof (foo) == "undefined") // true


It makes much more sense, IMHO, for them to be null, since they were
unsupplied. Otherwise you are creating new objects in memory (strings of
"undefined"), and then the checking comes down to string comparison,
when in
reality the elements should just be nothing, nil, null.

On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/06, Thomas Fuchs
<t.fuchs-moWQItti3gBl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > hmm-- i''ve modelled it after the rails ruby extension[1].
>
> Which uses nil.
>
> > Note that the german version of the article is much clearer and
> > mentions the synonymity of null and nil explicitly.
>
> I believe the english version has some good points, see below.
>
> > So null in JavaScript should be equal to nil in Ruby.
>
> There are reasons to say nil in Ruby == undefined in Javascript.
>
> The Wikipedia article distinguishes between two meanings:
>
> Quote: Null is a special value for a pointer (or other kind of object
> reference) used to signify that the pointer intentionally does not
> have a target. [...] Some languages use other nomenclature for such a
> pointer, e.g., nil, undefined, void reference, etc.
>
> => undefined in Javascript, nil in Ruby
>
> Quote: In many disciplines, the concept of null allows a three-valued
> logic, with null indicating "unknown value".
>
> => null in Javascript. What about Ruby, does it have something similar?
>
> Javascript supports both concepts with null and undefined
> respectively. Using undefined instead of null makes sure, that you can
> have an array with members using this three-valued logic.
>
> Furthermore: "var foo;" depicts a variable that does not have a
value.
> foo is undefined, not null. And I believe this is what the filler
> elements are. Array members that do not have a value (that are
> undefined), because they were not part of the original array.
>
> Of cause, you can do arr[3] = undefined;, but still: choosing between
> null and undefined, undefined seems to carry the meaning better than
> null.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

>
> Of cause, you can do arr[3] = undefined;, but still: choosing between
> null and undefined, undefined seems to carry the meaning better than
> null.

No, you can''t. You can do arr[3] = "undefined" (string
assignment), but not
without the quotes as undefined is, well, undefined.


On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/06, Thomas Fuchs
<t.fuchs-moWQItti3gBl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > hmm-- i''ve modelled it after the rails ruby extension[1].
>
> Which uses nil.
>
> > Note that the german version of the article is much clearer and
> > mentions the synonymity of null and nil explicitly.
>
> I believe the english version has some good points, see below.
>
> > So null in JavaScript should be equal to nil in Ruby.
>
> There are reasons to say nil in Ruby == undefined in Javascript.
>
> The Wikipedia article distinguishes between two meanings:
>
> Quote: Null is a special value for a pointer (or other kind of object
> reference) used to signify that the pointer intentionally does not
> have a target. [...] Some languages use other nomenclature for such a
> pointer, e.g., nil, undefined, void reference, etc.
>
> => undefined in Javascript, nil in Ruby
>
> Quote: In many disciplines, the concept of null allows a three-valued
> logic, with null indicating "unknown value".
>
> => null in Javascript. What about Ruby, does it have something similar?
>
> Javascript supports both concepts with null and undefined
> respectively. Using undefined instead of null makes sure, that you can
> have an array with members using this three-valued logic.
>
> Furthermore: "var foo;" depicts a variable that does not have a
value.
> foo is undefined, not null. And I believe this is what the filler
> elements are. Array members that do not have a value (that are
> undefined), because they were not part of the original array.
>
> Of cause, you can do arr[3] = undefined;, but still: choosing between
> null and undefined, undefined seems to carry the meaning better than
> null.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl <ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> null is a value directly assignable to a variable. "undefined" is
a string
> represntation of a javascript type.
There  is window.undefined which is of the ECMAScript built-in type
"Undefined".
ECMAScript 4.2
>
> var foo;
>
> alert(foo == null); // true
Because both built-in types, Null and Undefined, evaluate to false in
boolean context. ECMAScript 9.2

foo === null // false
> Otherwise you are creating new objects in memory (strings of
> "undefined"),
Not true.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl <ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> > Of cause, you can do arr[3] = undefined;,
> No, you can''t. You can do arr[3] = "undefined" (string
assignment), but not
> without the quotes as undefined is, well, undefined.
Just try it.
>>> var bar = ["a", "b"]
>>> bar[0] = undefined
>>> bar
[undefined,"b"]

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Whelp, there I go putting foot in mouth with untested code. Just ran the
tests.

Yep

foo === undefined; yields true

Well then. Cheery-o, I''m out of this debate, KOed by Martin.

Still, don''t think it much matters in the end. Maybe undefined is more
correct, in light of what I just learned, but I''m more used to null for
these cases (obviously as I didn''t even know undefined was a real
object.).

On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl
<ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > null is a value directly assignable to a variable.
"undefined" is a
> string
> > represntation of a javascript type.
>
> There  is window.undefined which is of the ECMAScript built-in type
> "Undefined".
> ECMAScript 4.2
>
> >
> > var foo;
> >
> > alert(foo == null); // true
>
> Because both built-in types, Null and Undefined, evaluate to false in
> boolean context. ECMAScript 9.2
>
> foo === null // false
>
> > Otherwise you are creating new objects in memory (strings of
> > "undefined"),
>
> Not true.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl <ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> Still, don''t think it much matters in the end.
It matters when you use null to indicated "not specified". Think SQL.
I convert NULL values to null in JSON output. In that case, you could
not distingish between trailing nulls that were in the original
dataset and nulls that were used to fill the group.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

In that case why not make your JSON output represent the sql NULLs as an
enumeration or other mapping to the corresponding server side null
representation.

For example, if my server side code were C# I would make the JSON objects
equal to something like the following:

foo = SqlInt32.Null;



On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl
<ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > Still, don''t think it much matters in the end.
>
> It matters when you use null to indicated "not specified". Think
SQL.
> I convert NULL values to null in JSON output. In that case, you could
> not distingish between trailing nulls that were in the original
> dataset and nulls that were used to fill the group.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl <ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
> In that case why not make your JSON output represent the sql NULLs as an
> enumeration or other mapping to the corresponding server side null
> representation.
I am afraid, I do not quite understand you. I use PHP. PHP presents a
SQL-NULL as NULL, a PHP data type. And I convert such data to JSON as
in [3, 4, 1, null, 2, 4, null]. I believe this to be quite sensible.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

NullTypes = {
PHP: { NULL: {}},
dotNET: {
SqlInt32: { Null: {}},
SqlString: { Null: {}}
}
};

And then

if (foo === NullTypes.PHP.NULL) {..}

Using enumerations like this to map JSON objects to the explicit
corresponding server types would allow flexibility to map to other
variations that might come in and also to adapt this type of mapping to
other scenarios, especially if you start wiring up to external web services
on various platforms in true mashup fashion (Where the returning JSON could
potentially include meta data relating to the underlying platform). But I
like to mix in as much structure to this dynamic world as I can. That just
comes from my background I guess and discipline. This will probably boil
down to a matter of preference, like most things.

On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
>
> On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl
<ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
>
> > In that case why not make your JSON output represent the sql NULLs as
an
> > enumeration or other mapping to the corresponding server side null
> > representation.
>
> I am afraid, I do not quite understand you. I use PHP. PHP presents a
> SQL-NULL as NULL, a PHP data type. And I convert such data to JSON as
> in [3, 4, 1, null, 2, 4, null]. I believe this to be quite sensible.
>
> >
>

-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

And you can even add helper methods, like so (this could be simplified but
for sake of time I''ll just forego a recursive function)... This type of
thing would go into a core lib for the project, and maybe admittedly better
suited for larger types of applications where structure comes into play
more. (NOTE: nullObj would be good to allow a single generic recursive
isNull() method on the outer shell object.)

NullTypes = {
PHP: {
NULL: {},
nullObj: this.NULL;
isNull: function(obj) {
return obj === this.nullObj;
 }
},
dotNET: {
SqlInt32: {
Null: {},
nullObj: this.Null;
isNull: function(obj) {
return obj === this.nullObj;
 }
},
SqlString: {
Null: {},
nullObj: this.Null;
isNull: function(obj) {
return obj === this.nullObj;
}
},
isNull: function(obj) {
var isNull = false;
 for (var p in this) {
if (p != "isNull") {
isNull = this[p].isNull(obj);
if (isNull)
break;
 }
 }
return isNull;
 }
},
isNull: function(obj) {
var isNull = false;
for (var p in this) {
if (p != "isNull") {
isNull = this[p].isNull(obj);
if (isNull)
break;
}
}
return isNull;
}
};

then...

if (NullTypes.IsNull(foo)) {..}


On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl <ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
>
> NullTypes = {
> PHP: { NULL: {}},
> dotNET: {
> SqlInt32: { Null: {}},
> SqlString: { Null: {}}
> }
> };
>
> And then
>
> if (foo === NullTypes.PHP.NULL) {..}
>
> Using enumerations like this to map JSON objects to the explicit
> corresponding server types would allow flexibility to map to other
> variations that might come in and also to adapt this type of mapping to
> other scenarios, especially if you start wiring up to external web services
> on various platforms in true mashup fashion (Where the returning JSON could
> potentially include meta data relating to the underlying platform). But I
> like to mix in as much structure to this dynamic world as I can. That just
> comes from my background I guess and discipline. This will probably boil
> down to a matter of preference, like most things.
>
> On 9/22/06, Martin Bialasinski
<klingeling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 9/22/06, Ryan Gahl
<ryan.gahl-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> >
> > > In that case why not make your JSON output represent the sql
NULLs as
> > an
> > > enumeration or other mapping to the corresponding server side
null
> > > representation.
> >
> > I am afraid, I do not quite understand you. I use PHP. PHP presents a
> > SQL-NULL as NULL, a PHP data type. And I convert such data to JSON as
> > in [3, 4, 1, null, 2, 4, null]. I believe this to be quite sensible.
> >
> > > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Ryan Gahl
> Application Development Consultant
> Athena Group, Inc.
> Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
> Blog: http://www.someElement.com
>


-- 
Ryan Gahl
Application Development Consultant
Athena Group, Inc.
Inquire: 1-920-954-9798 x2903
Blog: http://www.someElement.com


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Hi,
I just encountered a situation where I want to know the position of the
mouse pointer of an element.
I consider this a pretty basic functionality, but Prototype gives me only:
Event.pointerX(event) 
Event.pointerY(event) 

So I thought adding:

  elementX: function(event) {
  	return this.pointerX(event)-Element.getX(this.element(event));
  },
  
  elementY: function(event) {
  	return this.pointerY(event)-Element.getY(this.element(event));
  },

But wait there is no Element.getX. I found out that obtaining the X/y of an
element is not trivial at all, but even more in this case I expect it to be
handled in a library.

Do I miss something or has anyone a reliable and fast implementation for
Element.getX?

Br 
Fabian




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

So, what is the final say on this? If my reasoning was conclusive, the
function should be changed soon, before people start depending on the
current behaviour.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
rubyonrails-spinoffs-unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFFw@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---