Re: [tlug] Variable scope in Javascript driving me nuts

[Darren Cook <darren@example.com>]

> ... I don't even know why it works at all: You define the function
> "checkResult" after the function call where you use it..
> ...
> 
> You might be wondering why I'm declaring the handler-function 
> "inline" here. That's actually typical for JavaScript and called an 
> "anonymous function". You'll find it in nearly all examples, like 
> here: http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.post/ :)

Either way is fine, and it is mostly a style decision. Anonymous
functions are slightly more compact, which is why you see them in the
examples - javascript is a bit like Perl, people like to show off how
few bytes their script uses.

Personally (if my function has more than 1-2 statements) I prefer named
functions, because I can then put a comment block above them. (Comment
blocks can be stripped off automatically for a production version.)

(BTW, Dave's original code declaring a function inside another function,
but for use as a global function, makes me nervous. I'd prefer a nice
explicit global named function, which I know *without testing* will work
fine in all browsers.)

Darren

P.S. I may have my facts slightly wrong above, but this thread goes into
some more detail of why you'd choose one style over the other:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/336859/javascript-var-functionname-function-vs-function-functionname

Including a link to a blog claiming that there is no performance
difference between the two:
http://blog.firsov.net/2010/01/js-local-functions-anonymous-vs-named.html

And this page is "Everything You Ever Wanted To Know But Were Afraid To
Ask":
http://yura.thinkweb2.com/named-function-expressions/

-- 
Darren Cook, Software Researcher/Developer

http://dcook.org/gobet/  (Shodan Go Bet - who will win?)
http://dcook.org/work/ (About me and my work)
http://dcook.org/blogs.html (My blogs and articles)