Hi Tobias. I see. What bothers me is the idea from object-oriented programming where the less code can be changed from outside the object, the more secure and reliable it is (especially in projects with many contributors). What do you think about it?
Yakov. понедельник, 25 марта 2013 г., 18:02:32 UTC+4 пользователь Tobias Beer написал: > > Hio Yajov, > > could you please provide some more details about why hijacked functions >> should be accessible via some global variables? What "later introspection" >> is? May be an example.. > > > Sure. For example, I am displaying the underlying core code in the > @TiddlyWikiDev > space <http://tiddlywikidev.tiddlyspace.com/> [1] using ViewCodePlugin > [2]<http://tiddlywikidev.tiddlyspace.com/#ViewCodePlugin>, > e.g. see the button "*View source code*" at the top of: > http://tiddlywikidev.tiddlyspace.com/#getParam() > > However, if functions are hijacked without providing a means to access the > original function being hijacked, then there is no way for *ViewCodePlugin > * to "introspect" the code that is actually run (by the core) as it is > only stored in some memory reference of your browser but not under an > accessible *javscript.name.space*. > > Cheers, Tobias. > > [1] http://tiddlywikidev.tiddlyspace.com > [2] http://tiddlywikidev.tiddlyspace.com/#ViewCodePlugin > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
