((Gods Google Groups is a PITA. What's wrong with markdown?!)) Back to regularly scheduled program…
In the case of option one, the coder in me says that it would be better to use some kinds of module system like [git clone/branch/manage with npm] or [git submodules/symlinks]. I think Sandi Metz <http://www.sandimetz.com/> would argue that meta-programing is best handled through object abstractions (option two) but I am ill-equipped to put words in her mouth. There is a third option… Fix the core popup code to have actual useful abstractions so extending the code would not be such a hack in the first place. I like option three the best. On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 12:59:10 PM UTC-5, Tobias Beer wrote: > > I'm actually not sure which way is better: > > 1. overwrite the core function entirely > - *my current code approach* > - this means, so long as the changes are traceable I can almost > compare the core code to mine, line-by-line > 2. only put the codebits that are needed for the "enhanced" > functionality > - *your code approach* > - means that I will need to test and verify if and what changes to > the core possibly have an impact to my code > - the cross referencing here may actually not be easier than for > 1. > - since I need to validate two code sources, rather than one > > -- 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 https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/36259b56-e520-4144-92a2-224ec1be204c%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
