17:13 <ylluminarious_> adambeynon, a couple of days ago, a friend of mine made this issue on the opal/opal repository: https://github.com/opal/opal/issues/680. i implemented your solution on that particular wrapper (opal-phaser) and made a pull request for it here: https://github.com/photonstorm/phaser/pull/1521. unfortunately, it looks like the developers of phaser don't know why or how this solution is fixing anything or what opal might be doing

17:16 <adambeynon> ylluminarious_: what type of object is `frames`?

17:17 <grios> adambeynon, frames is parsed from a json, https://github.com/orbitalimpact/opal-phaser-examples/blob/master/examples/assets/sprites/running_bot.json

17:17 <ylluminarious_> yes

17:18 <ylluminarious_> it's used in a method to parse the json data and extract the animation frame data from it

17:20 <ylluminarious_> here's where it is in the phaser source code, if you care to look at it more in-depth: https://github.com/photonstorm/phaser/blob/dev/src/animation/AnimationParser.js#L187

17:23 <adambeynon> http://opalrb.org/try/#code:some_array%20%3D%20%5B%5D%0A%0A%25x%7B%0A%20%20for(var%20prop%20in%20some_array)%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20%23%7Bputs%20%60prop%60%7D%3B%0A%20%20%7D%0A%7D

17:24 <adambeynon> so `frames` is an array in this case?

17:26 <ylluminarious_> well, a comment in the code says that it is, but one of those phaser devs is talking about it like it's not an array :-/

17:27 <adambeynon> from that example json it looks like it is showing up as an array, in which case `for (var key in frames)` would includes these additional keys from opal. But its not just opal, it would also include any added functions to Array.prototype, which is quite common

17:28 <adambeynon> polyfills etc

17:28 <grios> yes, right, when parsing from opal it add those keys (https://gist.github.com/gabrielrios/4e7440f868337ebbfa8e)

17:29 <grios> so, this is probably phaser handling it wrong, should be iterating with for(i=0;i<len;i++), as the other dev commented

17:31 <adambeynon> yep. for-in isnt a safe assumption for arrays anymore. polyfills are used all the time which would break them

17:31 <ylluminarious_> yeah, i think you guys are right

17:38 <ylluminarious_> adambeynon, alright, well, thanks for the help. i'm gonna wait and see what those phaser devs say.

17:39 <adambeynon> ylluminarious_: no problem. I will try and have a look through their code, and the wrapper, later on incase its something obvious im missing