'foo in bar' evaluates to null if bar is a native JavaScript Object

This looks wrong to me, @chochos:

dynamic {
    dynamic obj = dynamic [];
    Boolean bool = 0 in obj;
    print(bool);
}

Prints <null>.

[quintesse]

And nobody likes my idea to just create two toplevel functions to create empty objects and arrays? Because I find the whole business of dynamic vs dynamic [] somewhat cryptic (and highly JS-specific, if we ever implement dynamic for the Java backend creating empty objects and arrays makes little sense). Using functions would make it very explicit what you’re doing.

[quintesse]

JS is not the only dynamic language …

I doubt that those other languages will map perfectly to JS’ idea of hashmaps and arrays, so if we would ever support them as a backend we’d probably have to come up with other conventions for their constructs. To me this seems like one of these ad-hoc decisions just to make things work. Especially when creating a special syntax that only works for specific backend(s).