@Bram, controversial but honourable attempt ( same intent as : http://dbj.org/jquery.1.3.2.safe.slow.js ;-)
As I said previously: using JScript conditional compilation one can do a lot (on this subject) straight away. No building tools needed and no new files. --DBJ On Aug 27, 9:39 am, Bram Stein <b.l.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been thinking about building special versions of jQuery for a > while as well. I'm not sure if building a browser or feature specific > version is feasible, but it might be an interesting experiment. > Recently I have been working on a few projects that target a specific > browser, and it would be interesting to see if there is any advantage > to using a version specifically built for that browser (or a group of > browsers.) My main interest at the moment is however in creating a > version that is safe to use with code that extends the native Object > prototype. To that end I've forked the Sizzle code and added > preprocessor statements for conditional "compilation". My next step > would be to do the same for jQuery. Perhaps such an approach would > also work here (i.e. building special version from the original > source.) > > My Sizzle fork can be found > here:http://github.com/bramstein/sizzle/tree/masterhttp://groups.google.com/group/sizzlejs/browse_thread/thread/cb9597d0... > > Bram > > On Aug 25, 1:00 am, DBJDBJ <dbj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I am trying deliberately to stay "abstract" in order not to appear to > > be giving advices to the team how to do their job. I think they are > > qualified enough. > > > I would rather stay in the realm of "why". Ie "why" something would be > > a "good thing" for jQuery. > > And this idea of not having one jQuery file where everything is mixed- > > in for all browsers, I think might be a good thing indeed, for jQuery. > > > @Andrea : Sizzle is the good candidate. (its makeArray() mehod, for > > example, is particularly good example) > > > -- DBJ > > > On Aug 24, 5:04 pm, Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammar...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > Have you seen sizzle? The main core component that could make the > > > difference > > > since jQuery is mainly based on selectors and arrays manipulation? Try to > > > imagine sizzle was called jQuery.core.selector, I think makes sense to > > > start > > > from the main dependency that could bring benefits for everyone, even non > > > jQuery users. But this is just my opinion. > > > > On Aug 24, 2009 4:33 PM, "DBJDBJ" <dbj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > I thought my original aim was simple ? > > > I just thought it might be proven feasible to have one jQuery for IE, > > > and one jQuery for others ... > > > > The team is building jQuery already, using tools , so (I thought) the > > > same tools might be used to build these non-ie and ie versions, also. > > > And then tests can be done , using the same testing > > > infrastructure ... > > > > This is of-course not an "zero effort" excersize, but I think we all > > > agree that the non-ie version will be measurably faster on on non-ie > > > browsers than the original "mix-in-everything" version. And the same > > > will happen with ie-only version on ie browsers. > > > > --DBJ > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this > > > message because you are subs... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "jQuery Development" group. To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
