On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Craig L. Ching <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Yes, and they are sign of a quick dojo hack ;-) >> > Quick? No, dojo has been like that forever. Hack? Maybe.
I meant the missing dojo.require should have been in the (custom) code. Dojo's require system is great! > Anyway, don't mean to be argumentative, but I actually really like > dojo's require system. Once you get used to it, it's not so bad > tracking down these sorts of problems. Indeed, once you understand it, > it rarely comes up because you code against having these sorts of > problems by nature. I like the require system, too, since it allows for different deployments of the library code: as single, original js files for debugging, as bundles for sub-modules including several js files in one and as a big all-in-one package of everything you need for your page. That is really helpful in a world of > 10.000 lines of client-side javascript... Alex -- Alexander Klimetschek [EMAIL PROTECTED]
