Probably. But it is certainly not my idea ;) I mean there it is, for
last several releases ....
It is maybe that it is labelled "too trivial" to be part of jQuery ?
--DBJ
On 10 Nov, 20:45, lrbabe <lrb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree that the current isObject has to be renamed to avoid
> confusion.
> But we don't need any isObject using Object.prototype.toString.call
> anywhere in the code...
> This could be included in any plugin, where required.
>
> On Nov 10, 9:28 pm, DBJDBJ <dbj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > All is ok then ?
>
> > We/You/me just need , soemthing along these lines :
>
> > jQuery.isObject = function( obj )
> > {
> > return Object.prototype.toString.call(obj) === "[object
> > Object]" ) ;
> > }
>
> > jQuery.isObjectLiteral = function( obj )
> > {
> > if ( ! jQuert.isObject(obj) ) {
> > return false;
> > }
> > //own properties are iterated firstl,
> > //so to speed up, we can test if the last one is owned or not
> > var key;
> > for ( key in obj ) {}
> > return !key || Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call( obj, key );
>
> > }
>
> > Maybe a bit more optimised.
>
> > The solution above does not care about IE "thinking" of DOM methods as
> > objects, but apparently "it was decided", this is not important.
>
> > Job done ... after several months of mauling the issue ... Better even
> > then never ;o)
>
> > --DBJ
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-...@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=.
