+1 Thanks, Marius
On 10/20/2010 06:38 PM, Jerome Velociter wrote: > Hi devs, > > I'd like to propose we adopt the module pattern for our XWiki's > javascript modules. > > The pattern and its variations is well described here : > http://www.adequatelygood.com/2010/3/JavaScript-Module-Pattern-In-Depth > > I would follow the author advice and go for loose augmentation and > sub-modules. I don't think we need private states. > > Main avantages I see over what we currently are doing are : > * It enforces namespacing and the use of a private scope versus manual > namespacing in the global window scope > * It easily supports global imports (can be useful for example when > using jQuery in addition to prototype) > * It's more elegant and easier to read. For example : > > var XWiki = (function(XWiki, $j){ > > var mySubModule = XWiki.mySubModule = XWiki.mySubModule || {}; > > // my sub module code here > > return XWiki; > > })(XWiki, jQuery) > > instead of the tedious : > > if (typeof XWiki == "undefined") { > XWiki = new Object(); > } > if (typeof XWiki.mySubModule == "undefined") { > XWiki.mySubModule = new Object(); > } > > // my sub module code here > > I'm +1 to adopt it. > > WDYT ? > > Jerome > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
