Make Raven.wrap respect prototype chain

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.

[jlfwong]

See #401

Disclaimer: I didn't clone the repo and test this, I'm just sorta hoping this works, and using this as clearer documentation of the problem in #401.

[mattrobenolt]

@benvinegar This seems sane to me, but I'm not 100% sure.

Thanks @jlfwong. 🍰

[mattrobenolt]

Interesting that this didn't come from the loop before it when copying all the properties over.

This seems reasonable to me then. I'll cut a new version of this for you. :)

[mattrobenolt]

Hmm, hey @jlfwong, so I was going to cut a release, then I noticed that this broke a test. Somehow I didn't catch this before merging.

So this seems to conflict with #130 considering there was a test to explicitly check and make sure we didn't copy prototype. Can you shed some light here possibly?

[mattrobenolt]

Also... not sure why Travis isn't running tests for Pull Requests. Then I'd have noticed this before merging. :/ Ugh.

[mattrobenolt]

I'm inclined to think we can just remove that one test and it should be ok.

[jlfwong]

Thanks for the merge!

[mattrobenolt]

@jlfwong Can you address my comments above please? :/

[jlfwong]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

[mattrobenolt]

Thanks. That's my assumption as well.

I'm just waiting on feedback from @benvinegar as a double check, and we'll be good here.

Thanks again. :)

[benvinegar]

I don't understand why the test to ensure the prototype isn't copied exists at all. It seems reasonable to me to just remove that test

Agreed. I think this patch is correct (hi @jlfwong).

Hopefully this doesn't bite anyone randomly when upgrading.

[jlfwong]

Thanks! (hi @benvinegar!)

Is a new release going to be cut?

[mattrobenolt]

Yeah, I'm going to review everything and will get it cut today.