I think namespacing is always a good idea :)

----
Read jQuery HowTo Resource  -  http://jquery-howto.blogspot.com



On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:57 PM, ShurikAg <shuri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks a lot.
>
> Last question, is it a good idea to pass the object just in order to
> stay in the same namespace?
>
> On Feb 7, 2:51 am, jQuery Lover <ilovejqu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I tried to debug the code and the second alert is fired when
>> table.initUI() returns.
>>
>> It's probably how browsers work. When you call .table.initUI() it
>> probably goes through the .table as well.. or something... sounds
>> weird though :)
>>
>> Anyway, it's good you have resolved your problem :)))
>>
>> Good luck with the project...
>>
>> ----
>> Read jQuery HowTo Resource  -  http://jquery-howto.blogspot.com
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:39 PM, ShurikAg <shuri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I tried something:
>>
>> > If I pass to initUI this, and using it as bellow:
>>
>> > jQ.fn.table.initUI = function(obj){
>> >                if(Initialized){
>> >                        //return;
>> >                }
>> >                Options.cols = Object.size(Titles);
>> >                c = 0;
>> >                //set scc if needed
>> >                if(Options.cssClass != "" || Options.cssClass != null){
>> >                        jQ(obj).addClass(Options.cssClass);
>> >                }
>> >                //deal with the thead
>> >                if(Options.thead == true){
>> >                        //need to wrap first row with thead
>> >                }
>> >                //fill in the thead
>> >                var tHead = jQ("<thead></thead>");
>> >                var tr = jQ("<tr></tr>");
>> >                jQ.each(Titles, function(i, val){
>> >                        jQ("<td></td>").attr({
>> >                                        id: i
>> >                                }).text(val).appendTo(tr);
>> >                });
>> >                tHead.append(tr).prependTo(obj); //Options.rows++;
>> >        }
>>
>> > Works perfect.
>> > I have no explanation to that.

Reply via email to