Andrea, > The snippet you blamed for free, the Internet Explorer Scope Resolution
I never mentioned the article. I referenced your snippet in this mailing list. I don't know where you got that from. > What am I talking about, quite simple. If you understood IE scope > resolution, and again you did not, you realize the code you compared should > be different: I compared the snippet you originally used (http://bit.ly/3ePh0T) in my tests. The goal was not to show the correct way to use named expression, it was to show how incorrect your way was. My solution to the leak didn't require the use of named function expressions. This does not show a lack of understanding/comprehension on my part. > if your intent is to inform, do it in the right places, which is not this ML > for an unrelated snippet, It was very relevant relevant in the ML as this is where your snippet and questions about it originated. > This is pretty much it, still my fault I chose the third snippet, I could > not imagine all this effort for 3 lines of code, I wonder why there is not > the same effort for every single piece of whatever library. Thanks for *eventually* taking the time to look at what I posted, http://bit.ly/1uJTao, and compare the tests. - JDD --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
