We're talking about the same thing...
The only difference is that I was referring to jquery's bind() for events as
getting a new scope argument.
-- Sent from my Palm Prē
Daniel Friesen wrote:
Rick Waldron wrote:
> Available, as in the "scope" argument is being retrofitted to an
> existing function, and ONLY to that function.
>
> I don't get what you are talking about a fn.bind() implementation in
> jQuery, or what you mean by available in just one function though.
>
>
> Read ES5.
>
> function.prototype.bind()
I already read ES5, I use portions of ES5 in a number of js server-based
projects already.
However I don't get "ONLY" one function, since the whole point of
.bind() is to bind a `this` onto ONE function with one call. It's not
bind otherwise.
So I don't see any limitation. Unless you are under the
misinterpretation that after you have called .bind() on one function you
have modified that function and bound it's `this`. .bind() doesn't
modify the function, it returns a new one.
From ES5 15.3.4.5 Function.prototype.bind
> The bind method takes one or more arguments, thisArg and (optionally)
> arg1, arg2, etc, and returns a *new*
> function object by performing the following steps:
So this is valid ES5 code.
"use strict";
var a = function() { alert(this); };
var a1 = a.bind("a");
var a2 = a.bind("b");
a(); // Alerts undefined
a1(); // Alerts "a"
a2(); // Alerts "b"
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Daniel Friesen
> <nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com <mailto:nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> I made a post about how confusing people may find the name bind some
> time ago. Suggested renaming bind to something like event, and keeping
> bind as an alias of course. That was rejected.
>
> I don't get what you are talking about a fn.bind() implementation in
> jQuery, or what you mean by available in just one function though.
>
> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire)
> [http://daniel.friesen.name]
>
> Rick Waldron wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > While I'm glad to see a scope arg available, i still think this is
> > negligent to the future of jQuery and ES standards. I really think a
> > fn.bind() implementation would ideal (since it would be jQuery-wide
> > and not just available in one function), but as I've noted in
> the past
> > and is exampled here, beginners may find this syntax a bit boggling:
> >
> > $(foo).bind('event', fn.bind(bar) );
> >
> > Rick
>
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
--
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=en.
--
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=en.
