3 ms·
That's a good post that I hadn't seen before. Thanks. It's a matter of continuing puzzlement to me that, despite the fact that more robust and better-abstracte
by threedaymonk 13y ago
That's a good post that I hadn't seen before. Thanks.
It's a matter of continuing puzzlement to me that, despite the fact that more robust and better-abstracted methods of producing output exist, the dominant paradigm in web development is to concatenate strings together and hope.
But it's worse than that: many people actively reject better methods on the basis that, as I've heard it expressed over and over, you "should" be able to just write HTML, ipse dixit. There's active resistance to improving this awful situation.
I don't understand it. I wish I did.
- rdw 13y agoString concatenation is usually way faster both at runtime and at code-time than the alternatives.
- homakov 13y agoRJS is fast but not secure. Trade off?
- dopamean 13y agoI am currently building a web app and I've found myself doing a lot of string concatenation. What are these more robust and better-abstracted methods? I would love to read up on them. Thanks.
- nickzoic 13y agoDo you mean doing things (in jQuery) like: $('<div id="' + identifier + '">' + some_text + '</div>'); If so, consider doing: $('<div>').attr('id', identifier).text(some_text); which handles escaping correctly for you. Or equivalent in your preferred JS framework or lack of framework.