While it will be nice to pass in a selector to andSelf, it's a shame you'll have to repeat the selector in both the 'find' and 'addSelf'. I'd still rather there be only one function necessary. It's an awfully common pattern. Honestly, I wish 'find' had been this way from the start, and there was a descendants function that works like 'find' today... it seems much more sane to me.
Hmm... other possible interfaces/names - jObject.search(selector) jObject.findAll(selector) jObject.findInclusive(selector) // my favorite jObject.find(selector, "andSelf") On May 4, 4:47 pm, Brandon Aaron <brandon.aa...@gmail.com> wrote: > FYI... There is an open enhancement ticket that proposes adding an optional > selector to the .andSelf() method.http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/4446 > -- > Brandon Aaron > > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:11 PM, Pappy <helga...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Just curious... what's the jQuery-way of saying "Give me all children > > that match a filter and include myself if I happen to match as well."? > > > I've been using - > > > element.find("*").andSelf().filter([myfilter]) > > > but that seems kludgy. Is there a better way? If not, I'll just wrap > > this as "findInclusive" or "find([filter], true)" or something.
