Hi all,

Weighing in... First off, love the idea of Function#repeat. Wonderfully simple and expressive.

As Tobie says, the goals when doing it should be to handle all of the issues PE already handles, to reuse existing code, and to be consistent with other API functions.

Some notes:

1. I'd avoid requiring #curry or #bind on top of #repeat; #repeat should be able to handle arguments and context itself. Every curry at least doubles the call overhead.

2. Optional context would be helpful:

Function#delay(options[, args...]) -> Number

...with `options` being either a number (frequency) or an object with `context` and `frequency` parameters; the latter allows repeating method calls.

3. #1 suggests that rather than #repeat using PE, the guts of PE should become #repeat and the PE should use it:

var PeriodicalExecuter = Class.create({ initialize: function(callback, frequency) { this.handle = callback.repeat(frequency, this); }, stop: function() { if (this.handle) { clearInterval(this.handle); this.handle = 0; } } });

4. I'd like to be able to repeat functions not explicitly designed to #repeat, which suggests not changing their signature. Perhaps the self- stop mechanism could remain a feature that PE adds on top of #repeat (at the cost that PE functions have to be explicitly intended to be repeated [or must ignore their args], as is currently the case).

5. Like Robert, I prefer the self-repeat over setInterval (that's always how I do it), but unless we've seen significant issues with setInterval we should be wary of changing it, especially in light of how doing so complicates the API (e.g., return value issues). Perhaps this aspect is a separate question entirely.

6. If we do need to use something other than an interval handle as the return value, I'd suggest providing a stop function that works with both interval handles and whatever our new thing is, e.g.:

Function.stop = function(handle) { if (typeof handle == 'number') { clearInterval(handle); } else { /* ...stop it the new way... */ } };

@Rick: All of this discussion probably seems like nit-picking your idea to death. In fact, I think it indicates that there's a lot of support and appreciation for your idea, and we're all (well, nearly all, there's a dissenter) just trying to make it fit in, and make it as cool as the idea warrants.

On Aug 26, 3:33 am, Samuel Lebeau <samu...@gmail.com> wrote: