It was a joke! :d Mootools provides access directly to all the Element methods via the prototype and you never have to retrieve the dom instance with $. It's just fun to think about it.
On 11 nov, 04:11, Mr Speaker <mrspea...@gmail.com> wrote: > BTW, just to be clear: there shouldn't EVER be a reason ever to do: $($ > (el).parents('div').get(0)).addClass('blah') > > You'd just be getting all the parent divs, asking for their actual DOM > references (for no reason) then re-wrapping them into jQuery objects > before adding classes to them! > > On Nov 11, 1:12 am, Savageman <savagema...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > Maybe $($(el).parents('div').get(0)).addClass() ? :d (ahah, what ugly > > syntax :d) > > > Anyway thanks, topic solved! ;) > > > On 10 nov, 15:04, Michel Belleville <michel.bellevi...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > 2009/11/10 Savageman <savagema...@gmail.com> > > > > > About .get(0), Firebug keeps telling me: "$(el).parents("div").get > > > > (0).addClass is not a function" > > > > Sorry, I tested with .eq(0) instead of .get(0) which returns the pure DOM > > > element instead of a jQuery magic-array wrapping the element. > > > > > I still find strange (that eventually gonna change :D) to add the > > > > possibility to match a specified selector in the .parent() method if > > > > it only applies to the direct parent... I don't really need all the > > > > parents here, so it may be more efficient having a method that stops > > > > looping through parents when the one we want is found. I guess I still > > > > can use .parent().parent().parent() as I know the <div> should be the > > > > third parent, but that would require change in the javacscript if i > > > > want to change the HTML structure... > > > > If you don't need all the parents, use .parents('div:first') or > > > .parents('div').eq(0) as you've found out it's the jQuery way. > > > > I may even be so bold as to add you might like to try > > > .closest()<http://docs.jquery.com/Traversing/closest>which is quite > > > handy to find "the closest matching element this included". > > > > Have fun. > > > > Michel Belleville