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/