> this._input.bind('change', $.hitch(this, "_onInputChange"));How do you unbind the ‘hitched’ method? On Apr 8, 11:04 pm, pete higgins <phigg...@gmail.com> wrote: > My hitch() method does this kind of: > > http://higginsforpresident.net/js/jq.hitch.js > > It would look like: > > this._input.bind('change', $.hitch(this, "_onInputChange")); > > Regards, > Peter Higgins > > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 12:03 PM, gregory <gregory.tomlin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > 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.
