domassistant namespaced
rborn
Thanx for approving my membership.
I have a question:
How nice it plays DA with other frameworks? I am trying to obtain a
namespaced version because in some cases might interfere with other
functions form other frameworks.
I removed the
this.applyMethod.call(window, "$", this.$);
this.applyMethod.call(window, "$$", this.$$);
but still remains some methods added to the dom, like window.addEvent,
that might interfere with other ( mootools for example )
Is possible to make it purely namespaced?
thanks
Robert Nyman
I used to be part of developing DOMAssistant, but I'm not anymore. Off the top of my head, though, I would say that generally you could probably make it work, but there are some minor kinks to work out (like the ones you mention).
Best regards,
Robert
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DOMAssistant" group.
To post to this group, send email to domass...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to domassistant...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/domassistant?hl=en.
Dan Tamas
Robert Nyman
Does that make sense? Is it a good pointer to start?
Also, Cheng Hong developing DOMAssistant now might have some ideas how to achieve this compliance.
Good luck!
Best regards,
Robert
Dan Tamas
chenghong
possibility too =)
Chenghong
On Jan 26, 5:29 am, Dan Tamas <dan.ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yeah, seems clear (let's see whan i'll try to implement it :D )
> thanks
> --
> Regards,
> Dan Tamashttp://kroppr.rborn.infohttp://www.rborn.info
>
> On 25 Jan 2010, at 21:57, Robert Nyman wrote:
>
>
>
> > Well, the parts you mentioned needs to be attended to. Perhaps it
> > might be an option to use the closure of the core object and a
> > method in there to access a private variable, declared at the
> > beginning.
>
> > Does that make sense? Is it a good pointer to start?
>
> > Also, Cheng Hong developing DOMAssistant now might have some ideas
> > how to achieve this compliance.
>
> > Good luck!
>
> > Best regards,
> > Robert
>
> > On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Dan Tamas <dan.ta...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > Thanks for your reply
> > any ideas?
> > basically i would like to get rid of document and window methods
> > pollution
>
> > but if i do something like DomAssistant.window = window
>
> > a DomAssistant.window.myFunct = function(){} will be found in
> > window.myFunct too :(
>
> > --
> > Regards,
> > Dan Tamas
> >http://kroppr.rborn.info
> >http://www.rborn.info
>
> > On 25 Jan 2010, at 21:44, Robert Nyman wrote:
>
> >> Hi,
>
> >> I used to be part of developing DOMAssistant, but I'm not anymore.
> >> Off the top of my head, though, I would say that generally you
> >> could probably make it work, but there are some minor kinks to work
> >> out (like the ones you mention).
>
> >> Best regards,
> >> Robert
>
Dan Tamas
the window and the document, add an event "DOMLoaded" similar to
DOMReady
and avoid to attach methods if somebody makes
DOMAssistant.$(window) or DOMAssistant.$(window);
of course I think in this case the functions cannot be chained
anymore( and I believe this is the main issue )
Let me know what you think
--
Regards,
Dan Tamas
http://kroppr.rborn.info
http://www.rborn.info
chenghong
avoiding namespace collision. Get it from
http://code.google.com/p/domassistant/source/browse/#svn/trunk
Just call
DOMAssistant.harmonize();
first thing after including the DOMAssistant script. Let me know what
you think =)
Chenghong
On Jan 26, 8:00 pm, Dan Tamas <dan.ta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I think the only way is to remove any stuff that is polluting
> the window and the document, add an event "DOMLoaded" similar to
> DOMReady
> and avoid to attach methods if somebody makes
>
> DOMAssistant.$(window) or DOMAssistant.$(window);
>
> of course I think in this case the functions cannot be chained
> anymore( and I believe this is the main issue )
>
> Let me know what you think
>
> --
> Regards,
> Dan Tamashttp://kroppr.rborn.infohttp://www.rborn.info
Dan Tamas
conflict
there are some issues still with addEvent for example
considering we harmonized it, we will have to do this to get the element
DOMAssistant.$('#_the_id')
but if we do this:
DOMAssistant.$(window)
We will have window.addEvent that will overwrite the addEvent function
of mootools.
Until now I only added DOMAssistant.DOMLoad.DOMLoaded() that acts when
the page is fully loaded
DOMLoaded : function() {
for (var i=0, il=arguments.length, funcRef; i<il; i++) {
funcRef = arguments[i];
if (!funcRef.DOMLoaded && !addedStrings[funcRef]) {
if (typeof funcRef === "string") {
addedStrings[funcRef] = true;
funcRef = new Function(funcRef);
}
funcRef.DOMLoaded = true;
// functionsToCall.push(funcRef);
if ( DOMAssistant.isIE ) {
window.attachEvent('onload',funcRef);
}
else {
window.addEventListener('load',funcRef,false);
}
}
}
},
this in DOMAssistant.DOMLoad
and at the end of the file.
DOMAssistant.DOMLoaded = DOMAssistant.DOMLoad.DOMLoaded;
I am thinking on something like
DOMAssistant.Window that will be some sort of proxy for the window
variable, and will be responsible to allow stuff like
DOMAssistant.$(window).addEvent
without actually adding the addEvent method to the window.
Also with DOMAssistant.Document
What about some dimensions? :D
like $(id).getSize, etc ?
--
Regards,
Dan Tamas
http://kroppr.rborn.info
http://www.rborn.info
chenghong
document, will extend them with DOMAssistant's methods. I'm afraid
this is not something easy to avoid.
Just wondering, under what circumstances would you need to mix
libraries in this way?
Chenghong
Dan Tamas
Well , if you take a look at my signature ( kroppr.rborn.info ) you
will see a script I built.
It really needs to work in any circumstances.
Now I use mootools but the way I make it work makes me loose a lot of
performance.
You can include the domload function I made if you wish :)
--
Regards,
Dan Tamas
http://kroppr.rborn.info
http://www.rborn.info