Hey, thanks for correcting me. I remember reading about the allegedly
optimization pitfall some years ago, and somehow just stored it in my
memory as a piece of truth. I never even bothered to think it through,
but your explanation makes perfectly sense.
On 10/17/06, Bob Ippolito [EMAIL
Apart from the obvious, that Bob had event.stop(); in his example
(Which you could add if you need it, but most likely you don't), there
is one peculiar detail.
Some javascript interpreters optimize closures like this, so they can
be reused if called multiple times. This would happen if you
Both you and the blog entry are confused here. That's not an
optimization, that's how scope works in JavaScript. All
implementations MUST do that. The quote he referenced is completely
irrelevant to the behavior that his code has.
Closures don't snapshot the state of the program.. they just
Bob Ippolito wrote:
Like most languages in common use, function calls always execute
exactly where they are in the code. What you're doing is actually
this:
var result = change_html('target1', 'new html');
connct('target1', 'onclick', result);
That clearly is not what you want.
haha yes
Or simply:
connect('target1', 'onclick', function() {
change_html('target1', 'new html');
});
On 10/14/06, Bob Ippolito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/13/06, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I'm just trying to do a really simple thing by setting an event on an
element with
On 10/13/06, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I'm just trying to do a really simple thing by setting an event on an
element with connect() and then changing that element's html with
innerHTML. But I'm not sure how to properly pass parameters through
connect() to my function. I can see
