I agree with waseen
2009/6/5 waseem sabjee <waseemsab...@gmail.com>
> to be honest. it would not be wise using multiple different js libraries.
>
> you basically have multiple definitions that do the exact same thing....it
> really is best to stick to a specific library as much as you can.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 8:29 PM, Ricardo <ricardob...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> jQuery saves the '$' object on init, if it exists. noConflict()
>> 'returns' it to the old owner. Passing true the 'jQuery' object is
>> also freed. There's not much to it:
>>
>> jQuery.extend({
>> noConflict: function( deep ) {
>> window.$ = _$;
>> if ( deep )
>> window.jQuery = _jQuery;
>> return jQuery;
>> },
>>
>> On Jun 5, 12:06 pm, Alex Ehlke <capt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The online documentation for jQuery.noConflict() seems to be
>> > incorrect, or ambiguous at best. Here is the text I'm referring to,
>> > fromhttp://docs.jquery.com/Core/jQuery.noConflict:
>> >
>> > NOTE: This function must be called after including the jQuery
>> > javascript file, but before including any other conflicting library,
>> > and also before actually that other conflicting library gets used, in
>> > case jQuery is included last.
>> >
>> > There are several problems here. The second "and also" clause seems to
>> > actually be an alternative, not an additional requirement. This needs
>> > rewording, since it seems to imply it's also a requirement -- but it's
>> > impossible to include jQuery last, yet call jQuery.noConflict() before
>> > including other libraries, so clearly this needs to be rewritten.
>> >
>> > Also, there is a link on that page tohttp://
>> docs.jquery.com/Using_jQuery_with_Other_Libraries
>> > which says that if jQuery is included last, noConflict() is
>> > unnecessary (again, despite what the noConflict() documentation says).
>>
>
>
--
Gustavo Salome Silva
