Ok, test completed, this is the idea as working example:
[snip]
Array.prototype.If = function(callback){
var _filter = this.filter(callback);
_filter._filter = this.filter(function(value){return
!~_filter.indexOf(value)});
_filter._parent = this;
_filter._removed = _filter;
return _filter;
};
Array.prototype.ElseIf = function(callback){
var _filter = this,
self = this._parent.filter(function(value){return
!~_filter.indexOf(value)});
_filter = self.filter(callback);
_filter._filter = self.filter(function(value){return
!~_filter.indexOf(value)});
_filter._parent = this._parent;
_filter._removed = this._removed.concat(_filter);
return _filter;
};
Array.prototype.Else = function(callback){
var _filter = this._removed;
return this._parent.filter(function(value){return
!~_filter.indexOf(value)});
};
Array.prototype.Do = function(){
alert("Value: " + this);
return this;
};
([1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8])
.If(function(v){return v === 3 || v === 5})
.Do() // 3, 5
.ElseIf(function(v){return v & 1})
.Do() // 1, 7
.ElseIf(function(v){return v === 2})
.Do() // 2
.ElseIf(function(v){return v === 6})
.Do() // 6
.Else()
.Do() // 4, 8
;
That's it, a "chain nightmare" but at the end an expected result in ultra
chain. Dunno about performances, it is more an experiment than something
else, at least it works, so get as is :-)
Kind Regards
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Andrea Giammarchi <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry Ariel, there is a logical chain error in my example, I'll prepare a
> better one with a couple of Array prototypes and you'll deciede if it is
> interesting or not, is it fine?
>
> Regards
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Andrea Giammarchi <
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Ariel, thanks for the link, i quickly read it and it seems other people
>> thought about that idea before.
>> Anyway, my vision is more semantic and less complicated, since with a
>> callback inside the if you can define many expressions, do operations, and
>> then return true or false.
>>
>> What I mean is that your if().hasClass is limited to one or more jQuery
>> operation, while if(callbackInScope) has no limits at all and inside you can
>> return $(this).hasClass("whatever").
>>
>> In any case and for performances improvement, for the if else I would
>> create a jQuery istance instead of callback
>>
>> this.if = jQuery(this);
>> this.if._condition = 1; // as first condition to evaluate (make
>> if(this._condition) check simpler)
>>
>> so te call will be something like
>> $(elm).on("click")
>> .if
>> .hasClass('foo')
>> .then()..
>>
>> As I said before, this implementation suffer about And or Or possibilities
>>
>> $(elm).on("click")
>> .if
>> .hasClass('foo')
>> .And
>> .text()
>> .then()..
>>
>> as last limitation, you cannot compare properties:
>>
>> if.text() == "something"
>>
>> for this reason I suppose that the callback inside the
>> If(whateverCallback) that as implementation will be simply a filter inside
>> the method if
>> something like
>>
>> If:function(fn){ // set first list of elements
>> this._succeded = jQuery(this).filter(fn);
>> return this._succeded;
>> },
>> ElseIf:function(fn){ // exclude precedent elements
>> var _succeded = this._succeded,
>> result = jQuery(this).filter(fn).filter(function(i, elm){return
>> ~_succeded.indexOf(elm)});
>> this._succeded =
>> this._succeded.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(result, 0));
>> return result;
>> },
>> Else:function(){ // return only last list of elements
>> var _succeded = this._succeded;
>> returh this.filter(function(i, elm){return ~_succeded.indexOf(elm)});
>> }
>>
>> I did not test above code, it is only to demonstrate the ligic behind. It
>> does not seem to be that complicated but for sure it is more intense for CPU
>> and could be more problematic for mem leaks
>>
>> Regards
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Ariel Flesler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Andrea
>>>
>>> The if/else thing seems to make the code larger I think. If you need to
>>> pass a lambda to If, then another to else of elseIf...
>>>
>>> It's an interesting idea and it came up before. I'm not so sure it's
>>> brings clarity to code, though.
>>>
>>> Maybe .if().hasClass('foo').then()... but uhmm... seems to complicated.
>>>
>>> Here you have the old post I mentioned, maybe it gives you some cool idea
>>> :)
>>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-en/browse_thread/thread/43a69fa41f6e7089/6cebfee318992fe6
>>>
>>> Brandon disagreed back then as well... that's a good thing I think :D
>>>
>>>
>>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
