<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fun with browsers: for in loop</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop</link>
	<description>Cleaning up the web with Ajax</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 May 2012 07:43:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ajax 2.0 Developer</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246657</link>
		<dc:creator>Ajax 2.0 Developer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 22:18:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246657</guid>
		<description>Passing ACID has nothing to do with JS.  Ironically, Safari didn&#039;t even support hasOwnProperty until 2.0, which is a very core JS function. I do not like coding for Safari at all, but unfortunately, more of us can&#039;t &quot;just ignore it&quot;. I would much rather code for IE than Safari.  But hopefully you are right Steve, that WebKit quick adoption of ACID signals that they are and will continue to move quickly and things will improve on the JS side for Safari.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Passing ACID has nothing to do with JS.  Ironically, Safari didn&#8217;t even support hasOwnProperty until 2.0, which is a very core JS function. I do not like coding for Safari at all, but unfortunately, more of us can&#8217;t &#8220;just ignore it&#8221;. I would much rather code for IE than Safari.  But hopefully you are right Steve, that WebKit quick adoption of ACID signals that they are and will continue to move quickly and things will improve on the JS side for Safari.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246649</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 20:17:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246649</guid>
		<description>Wow... some people still have the attitude of &quot;Just ignore it&quot;... what a cop-out for lazy developers.  Developing for all browsers is not hard, and is a must.  If you think it is too big of a pain in the butt... then you need a new job... cuz that ain&#039;t going away anytime soon!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow&#8230; some people still have the attitude of &#8220;Just ignore it&#8221;&#8230; what a cop-out for lazy developers.  Developing for all browsers is not hard, and is a must.  If you think it is too big of a pain in the butt&#8230; then you need a new job&#8230; cuz that ain&#8217;t going away anytime soon!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andi</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246647</link>
		<dc:creator>Andi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 18:48:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246647</guid>
		<description>Just ignore it. There is a firefox for Mac Users. It&#039;s enough work to condescend to the mass of IE users ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just ignore it. There is a firefox for Mac Users. It&#8217;s enough work to condescend to the mass of IE users ;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steve Cotterill</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246642</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Cotterill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246642</guid>
		<description>I think that this may simply be a matter of opinion.  Safari was the first browser to successfully render the ACID2 CSS test, which proves it was (at the time) the only browser to properly implement the CSS spec.  I have very few problems developing for Safari.  I think you simply need to avoid certain browser-compatibility pitfalls (which will never go away) as is the case with all browsers.  On the sunny side, it&#039;s good to see the WebKit community so active in fixing these problems.  I have never seen IE or Moz dev move so quickly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that this may simply be a matter of opinion.  Safari was the first browser to successfully render the ACID2 CSS test, which proves it was (at the time) the only browser to properly implement the CSS spec.  I have very few problems developing for Safari.  I think you simply need to avoid certain browser-compatibility pitfalls (which will never go away) as is the case with all browsers.  On the sunny side, it&#8217;s good to see the WebKit community so active in fixing these problems.  I have never seen IE or Moz dev move so quickly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JD</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246635</link>
		<dc:creator>JD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:41:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246635</guid>
		<description>I read the article. Shame on Buggy Safari. Safari has bent over backwards to be compatible with IE and in the process is compatible with Nothing. It is always the brwoser to fail in my code. I dislike it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read the article. Shame on Buggy Safari. Safari has bent over backwards to be compatible with IE and in the process is compatible with Nothing. It is always the brwoser to fail in my code. I dislike it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JD</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246634</link>
		<dc:creator>JD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:33:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246634</guid>
		<description>I am confused, does this break safari, does it work in safari, whats the problem and how to fix it??? One note, in IE (not sure abut the others) it will ignore the method toString() in any object when doing a for-in loop. I use Object.extend() with Prototype and noticed it wasnt making the copy of toString(). somehting to keep in mind.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am confused, does this break safari, does it work in safari, whats the problem and how to fix it??? One note, in IE (not sure abut the others) it will ignore the method toString() in any object when doing a for-in loop. I use Object.extend() with Prototype and noticed it wasnt making the copy of toString(). somehting to keep in mind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tobie Langel</title>
		<link>http://ajaxian.com/archives/fun-with-browsers-for-in-loop/comment-page-1#comment-246632</link>
		<dc:creator>Tobie Langel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:09:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ajaxian.com/?p=2060#comment-246632</guid>
		<description>Actually, you don&#039;t need &lt;code&gt;hasOwnProperty&lt;/code&gt; for it to work in WebKit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Actually, you don&#8217;t need <code>hasOwnProperty</code> for it to work in WebKit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

