I believe I got it, using:
jQuery.log = {
error : function() { ... },
warning : function() { ... },
debug : function() { ... },
};
as opposed to:
var log = {
error : function() { ... },
warning : function() { ... },
debug : function() { ... },
};
prevents a conflict with some other script that uses log in the global
scope. Of course, I still have to watch out for other jQuery.log objects.
thx
Jörn Zaefferer wrote:
>
> Daniel MacDonald schrieb:
>> It seems the former opens up the door to unintended closures. What are
>> the
>> benefits of doing it this way as opposed to the traditional non-jQuery
>> way?
>>
> Thats it! By putting everything into a single global object, there isn't
> the chance of colliding with other libraries or global objects in general.
>
> Mike answered the other issue :-)
>
> --
> Jörn Zaefferer
>
> http://bassistance.de
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> jQuery mailing list
> discuss@jquery.com
> http://jquery.com/discuss/
>
>
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Advantages-of-adding-functions-to-jQuery-tf3404801.html#a9486114
Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
discuss@jquery.com
http://jquery.com/discuss/
