[Greasemonkey] Long literal strings of html

Mark Pilgrim pilgrim at gmail.com
Wed Apr 20 22:39:40 EDT 2005

On 4/20/05, Edward Lee <edilee at gmail.com> wrote:
> Both of those work fine, but the second one allows it to get updated
> changes to the file. The first one keeps the original script contents
> while the second one goes back into the extension's functions and
> evaluates everything. Should it be allowed to get the new contents of
> the file or just keep things efficient by just saving it to a variable
> that is used anyway later for runBrowserScript.

I, for one, look forward to the first self-modifying Greasemonkey script.


More information about the Greasemonkey mailing list