A bit of rearranging of the code allowed me to achieve the same effect
without havign to pass an elements array to filter as shown below:
elements = $('.globalClass');
elemsToAnimate = elements.not (unselectedArr);
elementsToHide = elements.not (elemsToAnimate).not (':hidden');
elementsToShow = elementsToAnimate.filter (':hidden');
This works and according to firebug does give some speed increase
(though not as much as I had hoped). Still, it is a little
frustrating that filter() and not() can't handle the exact same types
of arguments.
On Jun 20, 7:07 pm, Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to optimize some code that currently works by having one
> function add a class to elements that meet certain criteria and
> another function that applies effects to them based on the classes
> attached. I found that adding and removing classes was relatively
> slow so instead I want to build up an array of elements and use that
> for filtering.
>
> I can't provide actual code because a) I'm working under an ND and b)
> I'm at home now and it's all at work anyway, but basically in the
> function that applies the effects I'd have something that was
> functionally similar to this:
>
> elements = $('.globalClass');
> elementsToHide = elements.filter ('.unselected').not (':hidden');
> elemsToAnimate = elements.not ('.unselected');
> elementsToShow = elementsToAnimate.filter (':hidden');
>
> // Do stuff
>
> elements.removeClass ('.unselected');
>
> The functions that would decide what elements should be selected would
> addClass ('unselected').
>
> I am optimizing this code to run faster, and as DOM access can be
> rather slow I decided that I would build an array of elements
> instead. My first attempt involved building an array of strings, each
> string being an element ID, and then using Array.join() to build a
> query string for use in filtering. The logic portion was faster
> because it was now just pushing vars onto an array, but the effects
> functions took considerably longer to start because either the string
> manipulation or using filter() and not() with long strings of element
> IDs was slow.
>
> My second attempt to speed things up involved pushing getElementById
> returns onto my array instead. I was hoping to use code along these
> lines to access the array:
>
> elements = $('.globalClass');
> elementsToHide = elements.filter (unselectedArr).not (':hidden');
> elemsToAnimate = elements.not (unselectedArr);
> elementsToShow = elementsToAnimate.filter (':hidden');
>
> But because you don't seem to be able to pass arrays of elements to
> filter it didn't work.
>
> On Jun 20, 6:10 pm, "John Resig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Can you provide an example of the code? I'm not sure what you're
> > trying to do from your description. (If I had to guess, I'd say that
> > you're trying to pass an element to filter, but I'm not sure why.)
>
> > --John
>
> > On 6/20/07, Gordon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > If I build up a list of elements by pushing elements retrieved
> > > getElementById onto an array and pass it to not() I can use this list
> > > to filter out elements I don't want. But when I try the same thing
> > > with filter() I get an error message:
>
> > > t.substring is not a function
> > >http://localhost/js/jquery/jquery.js
> > > Line 2659
>
> > > I have tried this with both 1.1.2 and 1.1.3a and gotten the same
> > > result (the error above was from 1.1.3a)
>
> > > >From what I understand filter and not work in a similar way, and that
> > > not in fact uses filter to do its job. Is there a reason why I can
> > > pass an array of elements to not but I can't pass one to filter?
