> If I am right, with this implementation, with "a, b, c" the results
> will be sorted twice.
> If so, would it be enough to replace line 115 with this one?
>
> if ( sortOrder && !arguments[2] ) {
>
> Maybe it looks dirty... but anyway sorting is not an cheap
> operation...That wouldn't be sufficient since it's possible to pass in a result set to Sizzle itself (jQuery does this, for example, to get some speed-ups). I'm not hugely worried since the checks are pretty fast - but yeah, eventually figuring out a way to optimize it would be fine. --John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
