Client side script initialization not practical

[Swaagie]

The client side script intialization being tied into the naming of the pagelet is a destructive pattern. Consider using the same pagelet two times, but with template content that is slightly different, hence you extend either of the two and choose a unique name. However that also means you now have to rewrite the client script, cumbersome.

[3rd-Eden]

Will be fixed one sandboxing is implemented as the source of the js file will be stored as string and evaluated once the pagelet is loaded.

Arnout Kazemier

On Jul 30, 2014, at 13:29, Martijn Swaagman [email protected] wrote:

The client side script intialization being tied into the naming of the pagelet is a destructive pattern. Consider using the same pagelet two times, but with template content that is slightly different, hence you extend either of the two and choose a unique name. However that also means you now have to rewrite the client script, cumbersome.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Swaagie]

Sure I just needed a mental note. While working on the npm interface I encountered some stuff I'd like us to discuss and I also know see why you opted for certain changes

[3rd-Eden]

We shall engage in an epic debate once I return.

Arnout Kazemier

On Jul 30, 2014, at 21:23, Martijn Swaagman [email protected] wrote:

Sure I just needed a mental note. While working on the npm interface I encountered some stuff I'd like us to discuss and I also know see why you opted for certain changes

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[Swaagie]

I do not expect you to read this anyways, shoooo :)