On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 12:27, Mark Lundquist wrote: > On Feb 15, 2004, at 2:03 AM, Bruno Dumon wrote: > > > On Sun, 2004-02-15 at 10:50, Mark Lundquist wrote: > >> Why not just call the form.createBinding(), like woody() does? > > > > Because that method doesn't return anything, but stores the binding in > > a > > property of the form object, called binding. > > Ah right... Is there any reason I shouldn't Bugzilla a request for > createBinding() to return the created binding? It clearly would make > this kind of thing more straightforward, for a one-line code change. > You might know of some reason why it's a bad idea, so I won't bother if > it's going to be a waste of time...
I don't think it's a good idea that createBinding() would both set the form.binding and return it. Rather, a second createBinding() function could be added to woody2.js, outside of the form object, which could be used by form.createBinding and stand-alone. -- Bruno Dumon http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
