Comments on: E4X: Not as awful as I thought http://www.lshift.net/blog/2008/05/07/e4x-not-as-awful-as-i-thought What happens at LShift Sat, 11 Oct 2008 23:20:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.12-alpha by: tonyg http://www.lshift.net/blog/2008/05/07/e4x-not-as-awful-as-i-thought#comment-94765 Wed, 07 May 2008 13:29:44 +0000 http://www.lshift.net/blog/2008/05/07/e4x-not-as-awful-as-i-thought#comment-94765 <p>Agreed, Tom. Having standardised DOM/E4X integration would be excellent.</p> <p>WRT monkey-patching - according to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_patch" rel="nofollow">wikipedia on the subject</a>, the term actually did start off as guerilla-patch!</p> Agreed, Tom. Having standardised DOM/E4X integration would be excellent.

WRT monkey-patching - according to wikipedia on the subject, the term actually did start off as guerilla-patch!

]]> by: Tom Berger http://www.lshift.net/blog/2008/05/07/e4x-not-as-awful-as-i-thought#comment-94758 Wed, 07 May 2008 12:37:30 +0000 http://www.lshift.net/blog/2008/05/07/e4x-not-as-awful-as-i-thought#comment-94758 <p>I like the term "guerilla-patching". We usually call it "monkey-patching". Maybe a good compromise between the two would be to call it "gorilla-patching"!</p> <p>It would not only be nice to get E4X integrated with the rest of the language, but also with the host. The fact that an E4X tag object is different from a browser's equivalent document object (when hosted in a browser) is ridiculous, and renders it quite useless for <em>the</em> killer app for this feature.</p> I like the term “guerilla-patching”. We usually call it “monkey-patching”. Maybe a good compromise between the two would be to call it “gorilla-patching”!

It would not only be nice to get E4X integrated with the rest of the language, but also with the host. The fact that an E4X tag object is different from a browser’s equivalent document object (when hosted in a browser) is ridiculous, and renders it quite useless for the killer app for this feature.

]]>