I'm using Firefox 2 still. Firebug is exception in all areas except for the javascript debugger. But it did allow me to set breakpoints and step into (F11) the code and inspect the variables to see what was happening.
Oddly enough the grep method did not change at all between 1.2.3 and 1.2.6. I think we need someone who's more familiar with the core to check this out. JK -----Original Message----- From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of darren Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 9:57 PM To: jQuery (English) Subject: [jQuery] Re: cant upgrade from 1.2.3 to 1.2.6 Hi Jeff thanks a lot for taking a look at my problem. I edited the jquery-1.2.6 file and added {} codeblocks to the problem area you described, and still the same error. Strange that the error is so deep in the jquery library. did you use firebug to find that bug? I'm finding firebug to be somewhat of a pain for javascript debugging, especially the beta with firefox 3. Are there any other good js debuggers out there? If anybody else has any suggestions for me, i would really appreciate it. thanks On Jul 2, 6:33 pm, "Jeffrey Kretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As a note, your "apparatusTooltips.js" script has a badly-formed array on > lines 30-37. This doesn't affect FF but will kill IE. > > But onto the underlying problem. > > The actual issue seems to be with the grep method: > > // Go through the array, only saving the items > 1197 // that pass the validator function > 1198 for ( var i = 0, length = elems.length; i < length; i++ ) > 1199 if ( !inv != !callback( elems[ i ], i ) ) > 1200 ret.push( elems[ i ] ); > > When show is called, it first filters by ':hidden'. > > There is only 1 element in the elems array. > > The loop starts off correctly, going through 1198, 1199, 1200 for the first > iteration. > > The second iteration it exist the "for" loop as (i<length) returns false. > > But when exiting the loop, it still executes line 1200, adding a null value > to the return array. > > This is likely a bug in FireFox, but it would probably go away if code > blocks { } were expressly defined around the for loop and the if statement. > > JK > > -----Original Message----- > From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of darren > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 4:42 PM > To: jQuery (English) > Subject: [jQuery] Re: cant upgrade from 1.2.3 to 1.2.6 > > right. > > ok well this doesn't look like just an each() error, its happening > with click() now too. > > here is the page with the errors:http://isebeta.uvic.ca/Library/Texts/AYL/M/Scene/1.1 > > generate the errors by clicking on "show" or "[+]" in the Commentary > menu to the lower left of the page. > The former generates a "object not defined" error > the latter generates a "this.style not defined" > > Again, this code works correctly with 1.2.3. > > A suggestion on the irc channel was to first check if the thing being > passed into .each() is not undefined, but I don't really understand > this suggestion. > > thanks for any help. > > On Jul 2, 3:55 pm, "Jeffrey Kretz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > That part of the code is the $.each iteration. What is the call stack > when > > the error is thrown? > > > Without a better context, it's going to be really hard to see what's going > > on. > > > Do you have a demo page with this error? Even if you can't post the full > > page for security reasons, if you can reproduce the error with a simpler > > demo page that would help track it down. > > > JK > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > > Behalf Of darren > > Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2008 3:00 PM > > To: jQuery (English) > > Subject: [jQuery] cant upgrade from 1.2.3 to 1.2.6 > > > Hi > > > I'm trying to upgrade a project from jquery 1.2.3 to 1.2.6, but doing > > so is causing a error in my script Firebug gives the error: > > > object is undefined > > var name, i = 0, length = > object.length;http://........../script/jquery-1.2.6.js > > Line 725 > > > I'm going to try to step through my code and narrow down the problem, > > but i'd appreciate any other suggestions. thanks
