Although I am not github-ing jQuery or its tests , this might help :
http://dbj.org/4/test/objlrl.htm
Here I also cater for IE, where dom methods are object-s ...
This also works on Opera 5 Mini (Symbian)
PS: I do not see that Robert solution fails on empty function? aka :
function () { }
http://github.com/jquery/jquery/commit/c2bbcd88335cf6f8df4ac9389ecbae90291377fb
contains this version of isObject (changed by me to work as a stand-
alone ) :
isObject = function( obj )
{
if ( Object.prototype.toString.call(obj) !== [object Object] ) {
return false;
}
//own
Seems like jQuery test page is NOT working properly (http://jquery.com/
test/)
- There was about 204 tests, and now only 82 tests are working.
- Major browsers (IE, Firefox, Chrome) is failed for lots of tests.
when I open http://view.jquery.com/tags/1.3.2/ ,
It seems like test directory is
PS: I do not see that Robert solution fails on empty function? aka :
function () { }
I think no one said that. I said that classes with no methods
(prototype with no properties) are not supported by my solution.
var Class = function(){};
var obj = new Class();
isObject( obj ) // true!
I agree that the current isObject has to be renamed to avoid
confusion.
But we don't need any isObject using Object.prototype.toString.call
anywhere in the code...
This could be included in any plugin, where required.
On Nov 10, 9:28 pm, DBJDBJ dbj...@gmail.com wrote:
All is ok then ?
It doesn't seem to be in 1.3.2
There isn't probably much code relying on it out there, since it has
always been broken.
On Nov 10, 11:10 pm, DBJDBJ dbj...@gmail.com wrote:
Probably. But it is certainly not my idea ;) I mean there it is, for
last several releases
It is maybe that it is
By the way, if we use the code of isObjectLiteral only once, it
doesn't have to be a function either.
The less function call, the better.
On Nov 10, 11:19 pm, lrbabe lrb...@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't seem to be in 1.3.2
There isn't probably much code relying on it out there, since it has
Wat a hell is going here?
// Recurse if we're merging object values
if ( deep copy typeof copy === object !copy.nodeType ) {
var clone;
if ( src ) {
clone = src;
} else if ( jQuery.isArray(copy) ) {
clone = [];
} else if ( jQuery.isObject(copy) ) {
clone = {};
} else {
$.ajax is already one of the most complex and least consistent methods
in jQuery, so if anything I'd like to see it get simpler.
Can you expand on this? It'd probably be good to either document or
fix the issues you're encountering.
I think it's a result of the $.ajax method's very
If someone wants to pass in a random object to be extended we won't
stop them. So yeah, someone could do:
jQuery.extend([1,2], [3]) and get [3,2] as a result - not sure why you
would want to, though. I can't think of a reason to explicitly prevent
this behavior, at least.
(On a related note I've
I think it's a result of the $.ajax method's very ambitious scope. The
behavior can change quite a bit depending on the arguments, and many
argument combinations aren't valid.
http://docs.jquery.com/Ajax/jQuery.ajax#options
Just a few examples: jsonp and cross-domain json/script requests
Yeah, that test page is kind of broken right now because it's pulling
in a newer version of QUnit (one that doesn't work with the 1.3.2
suite). If you want to run the latest test suite the best way to do
that is to pull from the 1.3.2 release zip file:
$.get(url, callback).error( onError )
That creates a potential race condition, since the async request is
made and may complete before the onError handler is attached.
Is that really true? I thought javascript was strictly single
threaded...
That creates a potential race condition,
I don't get your point. I am talking about what is extended
recursively, not what is passed as argument.
If you have something like this:
var options = {
nodes: jQuery(div),
num: 4,
date: new Date
};
jQuery.extend(true, options, {
nodes: jQuery(#content),
num: new Number(5),
date: new
14 matches
Mail list logo
