Hm, how implemented, usage of the third argument would not guarantee
that the results will be sorted.
Take for example: Sizzle('foo.barr', null, anArray) - there is no
extra selector, so no sorting too.On Feb 16, 2:22 pm, John Resig <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
