{"push_id":1291182364,"size":1,"distinct_size":1,"ref":"refs/heads/patch-2","head":"591e25cbbc562df42d1c21496aaae0e23f713b30","before":"d9513b740895adcd3b24f40884680f21e6876d74","commits":[{"sha":"591e25cbbc562df42d1c21496aaae0e23f713b30","author":{"name":"Dallon Feldner","email":"07d0023a717cff258b15da2d210d558f60483f3b@users.noreply.github.com"},"message":"Docs: Elaborate on `guard-for-in` best practice (resolves #7071(\n\nExplains why a naive `foo.hasOwnProperty(key)` call is a bad idea in the `guard-for-in` page.\r\n\r\nHopefully prevents future users from being as confused as I was :) (or, maybe worse, ignoring the obscure `{}.hasOwnProperty.call(foo, key)` syntax)","distinct":true,"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/dallonf/eslint/commits/591e25cbbc562df42d1c21496aaae0e23f713b30"}]}
{"actor":{"display_login":"dallonf"}}