<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.1.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The trouble with with</title>
	<link>http://dave.sunwheeltech.com/wordpress/2005/11/21/the-trouble-with-with/</link>
	<description>Dave Crane's weblog</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 10 Sep 2010 20:02:38 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.1.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: dave</title>
		<link>http://dave.sunwheeltech.com/wordpress/2005/11/21/the-trouble-with-with/#comment-35</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:41:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dave.sunwheeltech.com/wordpress/2005/11/21/the-trouble-with-with/#comment-35</guid>
					<description>Thanks for owning up, Simon. I'll have to fix it now, rather than just griping about it on my blog :-)

For the benefit of everybody not in the Historic Futures office today, we decided that the best solution that doesn't use 'with' is simply to define a local variable to do what you want. 

var status=null;
var els=document.myForm.elements;
for (var i=0;i</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Thanks for owning up, Simon. I&#8217;ll have to fix it now, rather than just griping about it on my blog :-)</p>
	<p>For the benefit of everybody not in the Historic Futures office today, we decided that the best solution that doesn&#8217;t use &#8216;with&#8217; is simply to define a local variable to do what you want. </p>
	<p>var status=null;<br />
var els=document.myForm.elements;<br />
for (var i=0;i
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Simon Warrick</title>
		<link>http://dave.sunwheeltech.com/wordpress/2005/11/21/the-trouble-with-with/#comment-34</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2005 22:50:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dave.sunwheeltech.com/wordpress/2005/11/21/the-trouble-with-with/#comment-34</guid>
					<description>Hands up! It was me. I have an excuse, and it's a poor one. Without the &quot;with&quot; the amount of typing I was going to have to do was much greater. As I wrote it, I cringed. It's one of those weird pieces of code that even a year on(?) I still remember writing and hating as I felt sure there was a simpler better way to do it, but as usual it was urgent that it be done... I have a feeling that it may be the only time it is used throughout the whole 10000+ lines of code, and you found it... Thanks Dave!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>Hands up! It was me. I have an excuse, and it&#8217;s a poor one. Without the &#8220;with&#8221; the amount of typing I was going to have to do was much greater. As I wrote it, I cringed. It&#8217;s one of those weird pieces of code that even a year on(?) I still remember writing and hating as I felt sure there was a simpler better way to do it, but as usual it was urgent that it be done&#8230; I have a feeling that it may be the only time it is used throughout the whole 10000+ lines of code, and you found it&#8230; Thanks Dave!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
