the only difficulty I am having with
Balazs Endresz's approach (which I have also
implemented in my environment) is if another developer passes a
function as 'data' param, the results become unpredictable. Though I
don't *think* anybody should be passing a function to access as
event.data, it currently does work to do so.
though changing the pattern to no longer have the handler as the last
param may cause minor confusion, it should not cause any backward
compatibility issues.
I have never bench marked the performance of 'return toString.call
(obj) === "[object Function]";' Is this faster than running typeof obj
=== "function" ?
very, very interested in seeing the core of jquery improved to include
a capability to apply correct scope to the handler function
thanks!
-gregory
On Mar 29, 3:26 am, Azat Razetdinov <razetdi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> From the updated jQuery 1.4 Roadmap:
>
> > If you need a different object for the scope, why not use the data argument
> > to transport it?
>
> In OOP-style applications the handler is often not an anonymous
> function but a link to the current objects's prototype method:
>
> this._input.bind('change', this._onInputChange, this);
>
> And all prototype methods expect that 'this' points to the current
> object. If one needs the jQuery object, he could happily use
> event.currentTarget to reach it.
>
> One would recommend binding all handlers with anonymous functions,
> e.g.:
>
> var that = this;
> this._input.bind('change', function (event) { that._onInputChange
> (event) });
>
> 1. It's more verbose. 2. There's no way to unbind this handler.
>
> On Feb 23, 11:56 pm, Azat Razetdinov <razetdi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Passing handler after scope is not suitable for two reasons:
>
> > 1. There's no way to determine whether data or scope is passed in a
> > three-argument method call.
> > 2. Passing scope after handler is common pattern in JavaScript 1.6
> > methods like forEach.
>
> > On Dec 25 2008, 11:08 pm, "Eduardo Lundgren"
>
> > <eduardolundg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The isFunction is faster now but still has more coast that when you don't
> > > need to call it.
>
> > > We should keep the handler as the last parameter to fit with the jQuery
> > > API,
> > > the change is compatible with it.
>
> > > $('div').bind('click', {data: true}, scope, *scope.internalHandler*);
>
> > > Scoping events is a good addition to jQuery.
>
> > > Ariel, Joern, John? Let me know if it make sense for you.
>
> > > Thanks,
> > > Eduardo Lundgren
>
> > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Balazs Endresz
> > > <balazs.endr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > True, but the new isFunction is a couple of times faster than the old
> > > > one, though it's still many times faster to directly call
> > > > Object.prototype.toString, which is far below 0.001ms. But as the
> > > > callback function is the last parameter everywhere in jQuery it might
> > > > be confusing to change this pattern, it just looked more like binding
> > > > the function with a native method for me.
>
> > > > On Dec 25, 7:06 pm, "Eduardo Lundgren" <eduardolundg...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hi Balazs,
>
> > > > > Thanks for give us your opinion.
>
> > > > > When you use $.isFunction(data) on the bind method it is very
> > > > > expensive
> > > > when
> > > > > you have a lot of iterations.
>
> > > > > Diff the file I attached with the original file (rev. 5996) I made
> > > > > only a
> > > > > small change on the bind() method, and it's compatible with data and
> > > > > with
> > > > > out API.
>
> > > > > On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 3:05 AM, Balazs Endresz <
> > > > balazs.endr...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hi, I think this would be really useful! I've also modified jQuery
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > do this a while ago (1.2.6) but with the new scope being the last
> > > > > > argument, so it works without the data object as well:
>
> > > > > > jQuery.fn.bind=function( type, data, fn, bind ) {
> > > > > > return type == "unload" ? this.one(type, data, fn) :
> > > > > > this.each
> > > > > > (function(){
> > > > > > if( $.isFunction(data) )
> > > > > > jQuery.event.add( this, type, data,
> > > > bind, fn
> > > > > > );
> > > > > > else
> > > > > > jQuery.event.add( this, type, fn,
> > > > > > data,
> > > > bind
> > > > > > );
> > > > > > });
> > > > > > }
>
> > > > > > jQuery.event = {
> > > > > > add: function(elem, types, handler, data, bind) {
> > > > > > if ( elem.nodeType == 3 || elem.nodeType == 8 )
> > > > > > return;
>
> > > > > > if( bind != undefined )
> > > > > > handler = jQuery.bind(handler, bind);
> > > > > > //change
> > > > scope
> > > > > > ...
>
> > > > > > jQuery.each(
> > > > > > ("blur,focus,load,resize,scroll,unload,click,dblclick," +
>
> > > > "mousedown,mouseup,mousemove,mouseover,mouseout,mouseenter,mouseleave,"
> > > > > > +
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "change,select,submit,keydown,keypress,keyup,error").split(","),
> > > > > > function(i, name){
>
> > > > > > // Handle event binding
> > > > > > jQuery.fn[name] = function(fn, bind){ //second argument for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > scope
> > > > > > return fn ? this.bind(name, fn, bind) :
> > > > this.trigger(name);
> > > > > > };
> > > > > > });
>
> > > > > > where jQuery.bind is:
>
> > > > > > jQuery.bind=function( fn, bind ){
> > > > > > var args = $.makeArray( arguments ).slice(2);
> > > > > > if( args.length == 1 && $.isArray( args[0] ) )
> > > > > > args = args[0];
> > > > > > return function(){
> > > > > > return fn.apply( bind, args );
> > > > > > }
> > > > > > }
>
> > > > > > On Dec 25, 10:38 am, "Eduardo Lundgren" <eduardolundg...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > Hi guys,
>
> > > > > > > The .bind() method consider the scope of the handler the element
> > > > whose
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > event is assigned - that is the correct as default.
>
> > > > > > > I've been playing with the event.js and implemented an
> > > > > > > alternative to
> > > > > > call
> > > > > > > .bind(), specifying another scope, that looks useful for our api.
>
> > > > > > > I've attached the event.js modified from the rev. 5996 from the
> > > > trunk.
> > > > > > > The changes are compatible with the current API.
>
> > > > > > > Here goes one example:
>
> > > > > > > var scopeTest = function() {
> > > > > > > this.name = "iamanotherscope";
>
> > > > > > > this.internalHandler = function(event) {
> > > > > > > console.log("I am another scope method.",
> > > > this.name,
> > > > > > > event, event.data);
> > > > > > > };
> > > > > > > };
>
> > > > > > > var scope = new scopeTest();
>
> > > > > > > $('div').bind('click', {data: true}, globalHandler);
> > > > > > > $('div').bind('click', {data: true},
> > > > scope.internalHandler);
> > > > > > //
> > > > > > > handler, data, default scope
> > > > > > > $('div').bind('click', {data: true}, scope,
> > > > > > > scope.internalHandler); // handler, data, pre-defined scope
>
> > > > > > > Let me know if make sense for you.
>
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > Eduardo Lundgren
> > > > > > > Software Engineer
> > > > > > > Liferay, Inc.
> > > > > > > Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
>
> > > > > > > event.js
> > > > > > > 26KViewDownload
>
> > > > > --
> > > > > Eduardo Lundgren
> > > > > Software Engineer
> > > > > Liferay, Inc.
> > > > > Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
>
> > > --
> > > Eduardo Lundgren
> > > Software Engineer
> > > Liferay, Inc.
> > > Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
