Bah... you already said so... I should had read it all before
posting :P
--
Ariel Flesler
http://flesler.blogspot.com/
On 7 jul, 20:43, "Michael Geary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The array returned by .get() does have its elements in the correct order.
> The bug is actually in your code:
>
> > for(ai in arr) { txt.push(arr[ai].innerHTML); }
>
> You can't use a "for...in" loop on an array and expect to get consistent
> results. The order of enumeration is implementation dependent. It may be in
> numerical order, or it may be in the order the elements were added to the
> array, or anything else. You may note that you get different results in IE7
> and Firefox 3.
>
> A for...in loop also enumerates non-array-element properties of the array.
> For example, if any JavaScript code or library adds methods to
> Array.prototype (and many libraries do this), those methods will also be
> enumerated in your for...in loop.
>
> A numeric for loop would work correctly:
>
> for( i = 0, n = arr.length; i < n; ++i )
> txt.push(arr[i].innerHTML);
>
> The reason .each works correctly is that it does a numeric for loop like
> that.
>
> What changed in 1.2.6?
>
> The code you found in makeArray does assign the elements into the correct
> array indices but it does them backwards chronologically. IOW, makeArray is
> assigning elements in this order:
>
> ret[2] = array[2];
> ret[1] = array[1];
> ret[0] = array[0];
>
> That's perfectly valid code, of course, but a for...in loop on the "ret"
> array will give inconsistent results. A correct numeric for loop will not be
> bothered by that.
>
> In 1.2.3 the loop in makeArray ran in forward order:
>
> ret[0] = array[0];
> ret[1] = array[1];
> ret[2] = array[2];
>
> All that said, I wonder if it wise for makeArray to be running this loop in
> reverse, just because of problems like this. Would be that much less
> efficient to run the loop in forward order?
>
> There's some further discussion in the ticket for this code change:
>
> http://dev.jquery.com/ticket/2619
>
> -Mike
>
>
>
> > From: joelarson
>
> > I have just noticed that the order of elements returned by
> > .get() seem to have been reversed in 1.2.5 and 1.2.6.
> > Interestingly, each seems to run in the expected order (from
> > first element to last as encountered in the document). To
> > demonstrate:
>
> > --
> > http://jqueryjs.googlecode.com/files/jquery-1.2.5.js";> > script>
> > 123
> >