
For those exact reasons, lack of encapsulation means it's a maintenance clusterfuck. Write once, run away and try and forget it Many.
Such a shame browsers don't have a propah langwidge
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 18:14, Reply)

and because it's nice to do things well
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 20:16, Reply)

It doesn't make any real difference to your maintenance. Once you need to do anything complex in the closure, you're better of splitting it out into a proper function anyway.
JavaScript can be used well, of course it can; but it's a lot like C or C++: it takes a lot of discipline to use well. And the end result will still perform like a dog's breakfast.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 20:28, Reply)

They let you nest all kinds of code, callback and events, yet still get back out to a class based scope for sanity/maintainability.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 21:35, Reply)

(And sensibly, not doing crazily complicated stuff.)
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 21:38, Reply)

The trick to maintainability is picking the right way. Hindsight's always a bit of a bugger here...
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 22:23, Reply)

Not necessarily any single *right* way.
( , Wed 22 Aug 2012, 1:42, Reply)

But thought i was good. Now i'm ok and think i can be better. Closures, bind, call, collections, signals, they all wrap each other beautifully now, where before i was trying all kinds of things with classes, prototypes and basically creating an unmaintainable mess.
( , Tue 21 Aug 2012, 21:33, Reply)