Not sure. There's still a lot of tricky bugs that have popped up, that we still need to find the root cause of (then patch, fix, and re-test). Not to mention backporting the documentation from the wiki into the codebase again. I'm leaning more towards mid-next week.
--John On 5/24/07, Shelane Enos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there still the possibility of a final release this week? I've tested against the basics and some of my more complicated internal apps and all is working well. On 5/24/07 1:10 PM, "John Resig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Did you test it against the test suite? And did you test it for speed > changes? The reason why this is being done, in the first place, is > purely for speed reasons. Added extra checks or loops significantly > slows down the speed of jQuery selectors. The mergeNum technique is > the fastest means of checking for unique-ness in a set of elements. If > you can find a method that's just as fast, but doesn't have the > property, then we'll by all means use it. > > Additionally, while your patch does change some things around, it > doesn't change the fact that the mergeNum property will still be added > to some elements, thus still effecting applications like Wymeditor. It > just doesn't happen in this very specific case (which is what your > patch is attempting to work around). > > My suggestion would be to add the following code to Wymeditor to > remove the property: > $(...).find("*").each(function(){ this.mergeNum = null; }); > > I mentioned this before, but I still think it's the best solution. > It's a very specific problem with a very specific solution. > > --John > > > On 5/24/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> please take a look at my patch for ticket http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/1143 >> I'm not sure why mergeNum was actually used, I think a simple boolean >> should be enough. >> >> Cu, >> Volker. >> >> On 21 Mai, 14:39, Jean-Francois Hovinne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >>> Thanks for your help. >>> >>> Actually, I can remove the attribute using removeAttr, but the extra >>> DIVs remain (for example if you create inline elements in lists). >>> >>> IMHO, as the problem only occurs in MSIE - no mergeNum issue in Gecko >>> nor in Opera - I'm rather thinking about a browser specific issue. >>> >>> Thanks again, >>> Jean-François >> >> > >