This problem that comes with ajax its a headache... livequery its a
great iniciative to solve it... but has it issues, but everyone has to
remember, that the problem the this plugin is trying to solve its a
problem of the core of the nature of ajax request... so... they try to
fight with limitations thats run out of it control...
On 2 nov, 16:55, Brandon Aaron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'd argue that it actually provides you more control over the element
> in the sense that you will know when it is initially added or removed
> from the DOM.
>
> It is actually pretty smart about how it watches for DOM changes.
> Thanks to jQuery's architecture this is all possible with very little
> initial overhead. For example if you had the following chain:
>
> $('...').css('...').attr('...').append('...');
>
> Live Query wouldn't run until after the append was done even though
> the css and attr methods are also monitored. It also doesn't apply
> just to chains. The above could also be broken apart and Live Query
> still wouldn't run until after the append was done.
>
> $('...').css('...');
> $('...').attr('...');
> $('...').append('...');
>
> The performance issues come about when you are selecting _lots_ of
> elements with several Live Queries. It has the same performance
> concerns as you would with regular jQuery selectors. For example to
> increase performance give it a context.
>
> $('div', '#myDynamicArea').livequery('...')
>
> That will obviously run faster than just $('div').livequery('...').
>
> As with all performance concerns ... don't get caught up in pre-
> optimizations. After the app is built use profiling and experiment
> with selectors to find the areas that are actually slowing you down.
>
> Finally, Live Query will never bind a particular event to an element
> more than once. In fact it _only_ binds the event (or calls the
> callback) once per a newly matched element.
>
> Live Query's main purpose is to solve a _very_ common problem in AJAX
> development ... the need to rebind events to elements added to the DOM
> after the initial page load. It does this _very_ well and on most
> common uses there will be absolutely no noticeable performance hit.
>
> --
> Brandon Aaron
>
> On Nov 2, 12:26 pm, Jack Killpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I 2nd Dan's idea. What has made me wary about dipping into using
> >LiveQueryis:
>
> > 1. loss of an element of control, compared to just calling a helper
> > function at the right time to rebind events
> > 2. concern about overhead, since (as I understand it), it's watching for
> > DOM changes and hence maybe not rebinding things in as efficient a
> > manner as I would want. This concern could just come from not knowing
> > (or having looked at) how it works under the covers, but I'd have to
> > make time for that, to ease my concerns
> > 3. concern about possibly rebinding things that I don't want rebound, so
> > I'd have to write code to prevent it, ending up with around as much code
> > as just rebinding via my helper function
>
> > - Jack
>
> > Dan G. Switzer, II wrote:
>
> > > I think what I'd be more interested is having a method that would allow me
> > > to really easily *manually* re-apply effects/events to a jQuery object.
>
> > > For example:
> > > $('li')
> > > .cache('some.name', function(){
> > > // use the helper function hover to bind a mouseover and mouseout
> > > event
> > > $(this)
> > > .hover(function() {
> > > $(this).addClass('hover');
> > > }, function() {
> > > $(this).removeClass('hover');
> > > });
> > > });
>
> > > Now you could do:
> > > $('li').applyCache('some.name');
>
> > > Something like that would definitely save me some coding. (I'd allow a
> > > manual cache "key", just so you could re-use the chain on other
> > > selectors.)
>
> > > The benefit is you don't have the overhead of having to constantly monitor
> > > the DOM, but you have an easy way to re-apply a bunch of commands to a
> > > selector.
>
> > > Right now I just use helper functions--which isn't hard, just not very
> > > jQueryish. :)
>
> > > Too bad there's no way to programmatically know the jQuery chain. It would
> > > be really sweet to be able to do:
>
> > > $('li')
> > > .hover(function() {
> > > $(this).addClass('hover');
> > > }, function() {
> > > $(this).removeClass('hover');
> > > })
> > > .cache('some.name');
>
> > > And have the cache() method be aware of all the methods called in the
> > > current chain.
>
> > > -Dan
>
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > >> Behalf Of tlphipps
> > >> Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2007 9:22 AM
> > >> To: jQuery (English)
> > >> Subject: [jQuery] Re:LiveQuery(Discuss Please)
>
> > >> I'd like to second this opinion. I'm usinglivequerymore and more,
> > >> but there are plenty of places where I DON'T use it, so not having it
> > >> in the core would still be my preference.
>
> > >> On Nov 1, 5:53 am, James Dempster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >>> My less than one pence worth would be I love and use the plugin, but I
> > >>> don't think it should be included into jQuery core, I would
> > >>> like to see jQuery core stay light and fresh. There's nothing wrong
> > >>> with addingLiveQueryyourself, either just add another js file to
> > >>> your html or append all the plugins you want to the same js file.
>
> > >>> /James
>
> > >>> On Nov 1, 2:04 am, "Yehuda Katz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >>>> So as far as I'm concerned,livequeryis the biggest advance in jQuery
>
> > >> since
>
> > >>>> its inception (no, I am not its author). I'm trying to understand why
>
> > >> it's
>
> > >>>> having such a slow rate of adoption.
>
> > >>>> it solves this problem:
> > >>>> $("div.klass").draggable();
> > >>>> $("#foo").load("url", function() { $("div.klass").draggable(); });
>
> > >>>> beautifully, as you now only need to do:
>
> > >>>> $("div.klass").livequery(function() { $(this).draggable() });
> > >>>> $("#foo").load("url");
>
> > >>>> Obviously, that was only a simple example. The more general case,
>
> > >> wanting to
>
> > >>>> bind some event handler to a selector regardless of when it appears on
>
> > >> the
>
> > >>>> page, is extremely common. So again, I'm trying to understand why the
>
> > >> rate
>
> > >>>> of adoption has been so slow. Any thoughts?
>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Yehuda Katz
> > >>>> Web Developer | Procore Technologies
> > >>>> (ph) 718.877.1325
