On Sep 17, 9:36 am, Bernd Matzner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
It really makes things easier when selecting elements with variables.
Amen! Is there any chance of getting gt/lt() back in? My main
arguments are:
a) the same as above: working with variables is easier than when using
selectors.
b)
I have to agree with Stephan about the slice method, it's not intuitive.
But why do you want to use eq/lt/gt as methods if you have them as
selectors? Can you give an example where a method can do more than a
selector?
-- David
Stephan Beal schreef:
On Sep 17, 9:36 am, Bernd Matzner
On Sep 17, 10:23 am, David Duymelinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But why do you want to use eq/lt/gt as methods if you have them as
selectors? Can you give an example where a method can do more than a
selector?
You can do more with a selector in SOME contexts, and only after
converting your
The reason why i asked has more to do with removing same selector/method
functionality out of the jQuery core than advocating for selectors. I
see no reason to keep parallel functionality in the core.
As for your example couldn't you do something like
var c = a+b; $(...:lt(c));
Using a
On Sep 17, 12:46 pm, David Duymelinck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As for your example couldn't you do something like
var c = a+b; $(...:lt(c));
Using a method you would have to do that so you save some bytes.
Absolutely, but it's still inelegant, IMO. i find $(...).lt(a+b) to
be clearer.
On Sep 17, 1:06 pm, Stephan Beal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i think the main reason lt/gt were removed was because you can do the
same thing with slice(). John Resig said in a post a week or so ago
that they were also removed because they did only one thing, and
didn't do it terribly well (or
6 matches
Mail list logo
