Yes, I hear your points.
It is fine; my intention here is to further learn to develop my skills, so, the oposite, thanks for your time.
First of all, let me explain to you that, alas, not everybody in the web is well learned to produce script with that HTML facility that you describe.
If you talk about me scripting a specific thing, fine. Your points are more than correct and I cannot argue.
But also, you must take in consideration that what I try is to make a "software" so that the user, even if he/she is not experienced in JS at all, will be able to create JS for his/her sites. So you have to view the overall script not as SPD programming for him, but as SPD programming for the widest range of people in the web posible, form the expert that wants a quick solution to the absolute begginer, that only knows to fill the options....
The generator's idea goes even further than that...
Even the expert sometimes is in trouble when creating a script, because of the need to make a different function. Say, for example, that you want to program a script that makes a link automatically flash...
So you make your function my_function()
If I want to make another flashing link in that same page, I have to make my_function2() for the flash. If I create again the same functions/variables, the script will not work. It is both a loss of time for the expert and a puzzle for the non-Expert or the ones that don't understand the code or why that happens.
You get the point?
OK, I see. In this particular case you mean that I could resource to the "this" object.
The eval(1)+eval(1) mystery is solved by my impossibility to know the options the user is going to select.
I say, you are 100% right, but this is a different context...
Let me know what you think...
About your questions:
Errh... since H63934 is a number, and a string concatenated with a number is a string again and can be concatenated with other strings, what sense does eval() have in this context?
Little bit complicated... I tried the other way and didn't work.
BTW: Why is the code so obfuscated with those random variable names? Wouldn't it be much better and maintainable in the long run to name your variables "myListItem1" e.g.?
I fear that a user may produce item1 and then return the next day and produce again item1 and include it in the same page (remember not everybody understands), creating a problem. So the random saves me from that...!!