Two things come to mind:
1. jQuery also has a stop() method that is used to halt animations in
progress, so the name is probably not such a good idea:
http://docs.jquery.com/Effects/stop
2. it's already very easy to add return false; after doSomething() .
Wouldn't that effectively do the same thing as your stop()?
--Karl
____________
Karl Swedberg
www.englishrules.com
www.learningjquery.com
On Nov 25, 2008, at 5:36 PM, machineghost wrote:
>
> As a former MochiKit user I'm continually impressed by how well jQuery
> does everything that MochiKit can do, only better. However, there is
> one very minor convenience feature that MochiKit had that I miss: in
> Mochikit's abstracted event object (ie. the thing your event handling
> callbacks receive as an argument) there is a method, in addition to
> preventDefault and stopPropagation, called simply "stop". All this
> method does is invoke those two other methods, so it would be super-
> easy to add it to jQuery. If we did, it would turn code like this:
>
> function someCallback(event) {
> event.stopPropagation();
> event.preventDefault();
> doSomething();
> }
>
> in to this:
>
> function someCallback(event) {
> event.stop();
> doSomething();
> }
>
> which (to me at least) seems a lot cleaner.
>
> So ... what can I do to make this happen? Who decides whether
> something like this gets added, and what can I do to convince them
> that it's worth adding?
>
> Thanks in advance for any feedback.
>
> >
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
