Re: MutationObserver - a better interface

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:34 PM, Axel Dahmen <[email protected]> wrote:
> But, well, that's, too, even one more point for having had MutationObserver
> being a Node's member as it doesn't make any sense to observe a Node you
> don't have any more references to in code.

As I said you often do keep a reference to the node.

E.g. document.head.appendChild(document.body) will first remove
document.body and then insert it again. It would be bad if the
observer was destroyed while this operation took place as subsequent
document.body.appendChild(...) invocations would go unrecorded.


-- 
http://annevankesteren.nl/