Let me reprhase this: I.

Cone: It’s not about valueOf, it’s about the constructor

Sambrook: Hmmm. #io.js is mostly inactive . I wonder how hard it is to go from node.js to io.js. does io.js support npms? Do many npms already use the NaN api to be compatible with node.js and io.js?

Sambrook: S/Do many npms/Do many native npms/

Caravati: Sambrook, seems like that they are mergin into the future nodejs 4

Sambrook: Hannibal_Smith: ok. it was a political split anyways, IIUC

Polivick: Sambrook, https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/2522

Leandro: As of next week node/io will be re-merged

Leandro: They wanted to have the merged Node 4.0 out today but it got pushed

Leandro: Iojs has had node.exe aliased for a while anyways, so it was seemless

Balassi: Last time Joyent said a release was “delayed”. it was delayed for more than a year 😛

Schaff: We still need a V8 maintainer for our LTS build! Head on over to GitHub to see if the requirements match your capabilities. -It will be not easy to find one

Balassi: They just have to drop the LTS build.

Balassi: It’s not like joyent decides.

Balassi: It’s the Google V8 team.

Pae: Are they hiring? or looking for volunteers?

Irestone: I think that they are hiring

Pencil: Is not likely a work that a valunteer can manage

Jarchow: Pae, https://github.com/nodejs/LTS/issues/28

Woldridge: Oh https://github.com/nodejs/LTS/issues/28#issuecomment-125352304

Leandro: LTS for v8 sounds like a very hard thing

Leandro: How long does google support a v8? like 6 weeks at the most?

Rizor: Hrm, if an object method might be called a LOT, what’s better way to set the context – .bind, .call, or function { return obj.method; } ? I know binding it can deoptimize in the compiler.

Oris: Anybody doing some project that they need help with?

Sigrist: Rizor: it doesn’t deopt, it’s not opt’d to begin with

Desiyatnikov: Rizor: you can always write your own bind though

Echevarria: Which doesn’t have the needless things Function#bind gives you

Rizor: Hameen: yeah. this is for an iterator’s .next so I’m just trying to think about what would be ideal, given that it might be called lots

Rizor: Hameen: but yeah, given what you said – that it’s just not opt’d to begin with, .bind may still be the best approach, since I DO need to fix the “this” just in case it’s an iterator that relies on context

Rizor: This is to wrap iterators that don’t implement a Symbol.iterator method that returns itself

Walliser: Function{ return x.f } will be faster than functionx, f{ return function{ return f.applyx, arguments }}, which will be faster than x.f.bindx

Klande: But that’s mostly because Function#bind does a lot of stuff

Rizor: Yeah, that’s what I figured

Rizor: It MAY not even be necessary to wrap. I’m just fixing a lib that produces iterators, but doesn’t give them a Symbol.iterator. It actually notes that this is needed in the bit where it wrapped other iterators but doesn’t annotate itself – just an oversight – so I figured it’d be better if it also wrapped any noncompliant iterators it received for consistency

Reist: What happens when you say ! help? without the space?

Gingles: The topic mentions the command.

Zolman: I want to send a JSON encoded object containing objects itself containing scripts to a php page which stores it into a database, so it can be p****d by a python script.

Yant: Zerobaud: i think there are pills you can take for that now.

Bruin: Dash: what is wrong with this design?

Radie: Ah wait I see it now.

Hulme: Let me reprhase this: I want to create JSON encoded object in javascript containing strings or another object with strings to a php script store it in sql p**** it with python and restore it p****d