It seems like those are both overkill over the current ability to do: var my_updater = <%= periodically_call_remote ... %>; -hume.
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 3:08 AM, Frederick Cheung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 22 Jun 2008, at 14:39, Herval wrote: > >> >> In our project, we had to assign a variable name to >> periodically_call_remote, so that we could manipulate it using rjs/ >> javascript (for instance, calling stop()). The details are on this >> ticket: >> http://rails.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8994-ruby-on-rails/tickets/468 >> > is it worth allowing a little more flexibility? Eg I might want to > store the executor as a property of some other object. A flexible way > round this would be if you could supply a function and we'd call it > passing the brand new periodical executor. Can't decide whether I > think this would be overkill. > > Fred >> cheers, >> Herval >> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
