Maybe this can be optimized a little bit? I'm not sure if this helps,
but it doesn't use any anonymous functions.
var $E = function(tagName, attributes, childrenVarArgs)
{
var element = new Element(tagName, attributes);
if (arguments.length < 3) return element;
var args = $(arguments).flatten();
var size = args.size();
for (var i = 1; i <= size; i++) {
element.appendChild(args.indexOf(i));
}
return element;
};
kangax wrote:
> So for every single one of those cells (that $E is called) there is a
> "new Element" instantiation and 2 enumerable methods (that are being
> called recursively) : )
> Why not just use string interpolation?
>
> - kangax
>
>
> On May 6, 5:43 pm, "Erik R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I was thinking "Element", but now that you mention it, "Erik" makes
>> more sense. :-)
>>
>> On May 6, 11:36 pm, Hector Virgen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Very nice! Is $E() short for Erik? :)
>>>
>>> Erik R. wrote:
>>>
>>>> Recently I've been using prototype's wonderful new DOM creation
>>>> syntax. But I found that it's still too verbose. Say I want to
>>>> create the following table:
>>>>
>>>> <table id="myTable">
>>>> <thead>
>>>> <tr>
>>>> <th>Title A</th>
>>>> <th>Title B</th>
>>>> </tr>
>>>> </thead>
>>>> <tbody>
>>>> <tr>
>>>> <td>A</td>
>>>> <td>B</td>
>>>> </tr>
>>>> </tbody>
>>>> </table>
>>>>
>>>> Simple, right? But, as I understand the prototype.js DOM building, to
>>>> build this table, I'd have to do:
>>>>
>>>> var table = new Element('table', {id:myTable});
>>>> var thead = new Element('thead');
>>>> table.appendChild(thead);
>>>> var theadRow = new Element('tr');
>>>> thead.appendChild(theadRow);
>>>> theadRow.appendChild(new Element('th').update('Title A'));
>>>> theadRow.appendChild(new Element('th').update('Title B'));
>>>> var tbody = new Element('tbody');
>>>> table.appendChild(tbody);
>>>> var tbodyRow = new Element('tr');
>>>> tbody.appendChild(tbodyRow);
>>>> tbodyRow.appendChild(new Element('td').update('A'));
>>>> tbodyRow.appendChild(new Element('td').update('B'));
>>>>
>>>> Grossly verbose, I think you'll agree. Particularly, it's the saving
>>>> of the local variables that bothers me.
>>>>
>>>> But what if we had a shortcut function? Just like $() is short for
>>>> document.getElementById(), I think we could benefit from a shortcut
>>>> element function. So I've written one: $E.
>>>>
>>>> var $E = function(tagName, attributes, childrenVarArgs)
>>>> {
>>>> var element = new Element(tagName, attributes);
>>>> $A(arguments).flatten().each(function(child, i)
>>>> {
>>>> if (i > 1 && child)
>>>> element.appendChild(child);
>>>> });
>>>> return element;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> It takes the tagName and attributes just like the Element constructor,
>>>> but it will also take other arguments that will be appended as
>>>> children. Look at the new code to create that same table:
>>>>
>>>> var table = $E('table', {id:myTable},
>>>> $E('thead', null,
>>>> $E('tr', null,
>>>> $E('th').update('Title A'),
>>>> $E('th').update('Title B'))),
>>>> $E('tbody', null,
>>>> $E('tr', null,
>>>> $E('td').update('Title A'),
>>>> $E('td').update('Title B'))));
>>>>
>>>> A little nicer, don't you think? Some intelligent argument parsing
>>>> might also be added to get rid of those null attribute parameters.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I'm submitting this as a suggestion to be incorporated into
>>>> the next release of prototype.js. Let me know what you think.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Erik
>>>>
> >
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby
on Rails: Spinoffs" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
