outerHTML for Mozilla [JS]

[Peter]

This is my own version of outerHTML for Mozilla. It is a little longer then some of the outerHTML scripts floating around the internet because I didn't want to do it the same way, as it would have looked like I just copied them. I done this mainly for learning

Suggestions/comments would be appreciated

<script type="text/javascript">
<!--

if(!document.documentElement.outerHTML){
    Node.prototype.getAttributes = function(){
       var attStr = "";
       if(this && this.attributes.length > 0){
          for(a = 0; a < this.attributes.length; a ++){
             attStr += " " + this.attributes.item(a).nodeName + "=\"";
             attStr += this.attributes.item(a).nodeValue + "\"";
          }
       }
       return attStr;
    }

    Node.prototype.getInsideNodes = function(){
       if(this){
          var cNodesStr = "", i = 0;
          var iEmpty = /^(img|embed|input|br|hr|bgsound)$/i;
          var cNodes = this.childNodes;
          for(i = 0; i < cNodes.length; i ++){
             switch(cNodes.item(i).nodeType){
                 case 1 :
                    cNodesStr += "<" + cNodes.item(i).nodeName.toLowerCase();
                    if(cNodes.item(i).attributes.length > 0){
                       cNodesStr += cNodes.item(i).getAttributes();
                    }
                    cNodesStr += (cNodes.item(i).nodeName.match(iEmpty))? "" : ">";
                    if(cNodes.item(i).childNodes.length > 0){
                       cNodesStr += cNodes.item(i).getInsideNodes();
                    }
                    if(cNodes.item(i).nodeName.match(iEmpty)){
                       cNodesStr += " />";
                    } else {
                       cNodesStr += "</" + cNodes.item(i).nodeName.toLowerCase() + ">";
                    }
                    break;
                 case 3 :
                    cNodesStr += cNodes.item(i).nodeValue;
                    break;
                 case 8 :
                    cNodesStr += "<!--" + cNodes.item(i).nodeValue + "-->";
                    break;
             }
          }
          return cNodesStr;
       }
    }

    HTMLElement.prototype.outerHTML getter = function(){
       var strOuter = "";
       var iEmpty = /^(img|embed|input|br|hr|bgsound)$/i;
       switch(this.nodeType){
          case 1 :
             strOuter += "<" + this.nodeName.toLowerCase();
             strOuter += this.getAttributes();
             if(this.nodeName.match(iEmpty)){
                 strOuter += " />";
             } else {
                 strOuter += ">" + this.getInsideNodes();
                 strOuter += "</" + this.nodeName.toLowerCase() + ">";
             }
             break;
          case 3 :
             strOuter += this.nodeValue;
             break;
          case 8 :
             cNodesStr += "<!--" + this.nodeValue + "-->";
             break;
       }
       return strOuter;
    }

    HTMLElement.prototype.outerHTML setter = function(str){
       var iRange = document.createRange();
       iRange.setStartBefore(this);
       var strFragment = iRange.createContextualFragment(str);
       var sRangeNode = iRange.startContainer;
       iRange.insertNode(strFragment);
       sRangeNode.removeChild(this);
    }
}

//-->
</script>

[Eric]

Simply amazing.

[Peter]

czabs said:

Now tell me what's wrong with it

If I wanted to create a short script I would have done, my goal was to use DOM methods, and make use of the Mozilla range object.

Now as for your script, it is my opinion that you only posted that to try and make me look stupid by you creating a shorter script. You can be a real prick sometimes, why don't you think before you post? Do you see me going into Eric's topics posting a shorter and better code (not saying that I could, just an example)? The answer is No, I wouldn't, as I put myself into his shoes. How would you like to spend quite a bit of time creating a script, only to have me post a much shorter and better version? I think you would be pretty pissed off, as it would appear I would be showing off, and making you look like a amateur.

[california]

(last post was removed)

I wrote it because I saw it as a good opportunity to try using getters & setters (something I've never coded with before) and I posted it here to see if there was anything I've done wrong or haven't considered. In other words, I actually wanted you to answer the question at the end, I didn't just add that to be arrogant or whatever. I wasn't trying to write it better, I was just trying to write it without screwing it up. I seriously doubt my version is better (my guess is you probably haven't looked at it very carefully because you were mad or whatever). It's shorter, yeah, but I already know you don't care about that, or I thought you didn't. My goal wasn't to make it shorter either, it's just short because I'm not familiar with all these subtle properties that you've used in your version (createRange for example), so I had to work with what I know (innerHTML, RegExp and some basic DOM).

I was going to PM you with an apology but I see you've removed yourself, so I'll go ahead and post it here. I never meant to show you up. You said right from the start that you were purposely taking the long way to write the code in order to challenge yourself, and I respect that, and hope one day to have that kind of discipline and patience. One of the reasons I wanted to work on rebirth with you is because I look up to you so much as a coder, and I was hoping I could learn something from you, but I guess that's over now. Sorry Peter, for this and whatever else it is I've done. I kind of thought we were cool before this but now it seems we weren't, unbeknownst to me. I really hope you decide to come back, and if you do, I'll try to stay out of your way.