Uses Object.isExtensible() to identify if require is extensible

[jishi]

I stumbled upon an issue where dependant libraries wouldn't allow them to be rewired, I guess they exposed objects that had been freezed or similar.

I switched to a Object.isExtensible() identification instead, which seemed to have resolved it.

I also added the with functionality since we used that in our project.

[elicwhite]

You might want both: https://github.com/i-like-robots/rewireify/blob/master/lib/index.js#L36

[jishi]

Well, both cases return true however:

Object.isExtensible({}) => true
Object.isExtensible(function () {}) => true

However, that check would also catch undefined, which seems to throw error in node 0.12, but false in 4.0:

Object.isExtensible(undefined) => false (node 4.0.0)
Object.isExtensible(undefined) => (TypeError: Object.isExtensible called on non-object, 0.12)

So maybe an undefined check is in place to support 0.12 and earlier if that is a target version.

[elicwhite]

I believe it doesn't throw only for undefined in 0.12

> Object.isExtensible(4)
TypeError: Object.isExtensible called on non-object
> Object.isExtensible("")
TypeError: Object.isExtensible called on non-object
> Object.isExtensible(true)
TypeError: Object.isExtensible called on non-object

I believe that is why the function / object check is there.

[jishi]

Wow, that version... well, another option would be to use instanceof Object:

({}) instanceof Object => true
[] instanceof Object => true
(function () {}) instanceof Object => true
1 instanceof Object => false
"" instanceof Object => false
undefined instanceof Object => false
null instanceof Object => false

I guess either way is fine, but I like that all of array, object and function all are instance of object, which is what we want to test anyway.

[elicwhite]

I'd prefer to stay consistent with other similar rewire packages.

See this thread for more context: jhnns/rewire#83

Edit: Since that PR was merged, we could probably just use that file.

[elicwhite]

Can you try and see if this PR works for you? #16

[jishi]

Hi, sorry about the delay. That PR seem to work for me and my use case! Looks a lot cleaner too.

[elicwhite]

Sorry, I forgot about this. The fix has been pushed in 1.0.10.