Yep, this is what I meant - though what Martin suggests in the
next message (full namespacing) is a step better once your
codebase gets large enough to make it worthwhile.
The same thing also applies to top-level EL objects where (being
less naive these days :), we put our EL-accessible objects off of
#{adfFacesContext} (plus #{processScope}, which is our only
other top-level variable).
-- Adam
On 1/9/06, Simon Kitching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Adam Winer wrote:
> > One
> > of the items already on our todo list is moving all the functions,
> > classes, and variables inside a single top level object.
>
> Using a single top-level object is something I've been considering
> suggesting for a while.
>
> MyFaces could create a single "myfaces" object for javascript, then
> attach any further scripting to that object as "methods". This reduces
> the namespace pollution to a single name.
>
> Of course components can create their own "object", and attach it to the
> global myfaces object as a member, and then hang their methods off that
> object to avoid possible name collisions with other components.
>
> myfaces = new Object();
> myfaces.submitForm = function() {......}
> myfaces.ajax = new Object();
> myfaces.ajax.someMethod = function() {.....}
>
> onchange="myfaces.submitForm()"
>
> Adam: is this what you meant?
>
> Regards,
>
> Simon
>
