June 13, 2013
function inside and outside subclass definition
Arachide’s Question:
Below are some code from cocos2dx-js binding official javascript sample
cc.Class = function(){};
cc.Class.extend = function (prop) { //John Resig's extend
var _super = this.prototype;
// Instantiate a base class (but only create the instance,
// don't run the init constructor)
initializing = true;
var prototype = new this();
initializing = false;
fnTest = /xyz/.test(function(){xyz;}) ? /b_superb/ : /.*/;
// Copy the properties over onto the new prototype
for (var name in prop) {
// Check if we're overwriting an existing function
prototype[name] = typeof prop[name] == "function" &&
typeof _super[name] == "function" && fnTest.test(prop[name]) ?
(function (name, fn) {
return function () {
var tmp = this._super;
// Add a new ._super() method that is the same method
// but on the super-class
this._super = _super[name];
// The method only need to be bound temporarily, so we
// remove it when we're done executing
var ret = fn.apply(this, arguments);
this._super = tmp;
return ret;
};
})(name, prop[name]) :
prop[name];
}
// The dummy class constructor
function Class() {
// All construction is actually done in the init method
if (!initializing && this.ctor)
this.ctor.apply(this, arguments);
}
// Populate our constructed prototype object
Class.prototype = prototype;
// Enforce the constructor to be what we expect
Class.prototype.constructor = Class;
// And make this class extendable
Class.extend = arguments.callee;
return Class;
};
var Explosion = cc.Sprite.extend({
tmpWidth:0,
tmpHeight:0,
active:true,
ctor:function () {
this._super();
//blahblah
},
destroy:function () {
//blahblah
}
});
Explosion.sharedExplosion = function () {
//blahblah
};
Just wonder why sharedExplosion is putted outside the definition of var Explosion
It’s a simple extension of Explosion
outside its declaration. It is just an implication, I don’t think there has to be particular reason for doing it.