Stephan Beal escribió:
On Aug 16, 7:39 pm, Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
An interesting point - don't recommend jQ IF the point of your work is
teaching JavaScript.
In my courses, I teach using Web Services with JavaScript, AJAX techniques,
and others HTML Rich Application techniques
2007/8/16, Glen Lipka [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
As a non-programmer, (HTML/CSS only) I understand lt() and gt() mainly
because of lt; and gt;.
I think those are very easy. The place I get confused a little is when
you can say $(p:gt(4)) and $(p).gt(4) and get the same thing. Why
both? I suppose
$(p:gt(4)).show().gt(10).css(color,red);
Or, if you need to operate multiple time on same collection:
var my_coll = $(p);
my_coll.gt(3).css(color,red);
my_coll.lt(3).css(color,blue);
This stuff cannot be done by solely in selector expression.
I'm pretty sure this can be done with
Of course, but I'm in favor of lt gt eq. Maybe 'cause I learned FORTRAN on
college ;)
2007/8/17, Erik Beeson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
$(p:gt(4)).show().gt(10).css(color,red);
Or, if you need to operate multiple time on same collection:
var my_coll = $(p);
my_coll.gt(3).css(color,red);
Is this topic changing to the need for removing stuff from jQ? My
intention was to just get opinions about the comment Thor made.
On Aug 17, 1:04 am, Erik Beeson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
$(p:gt(4)).show().gt(10).css(color,red);
Or, if you need to operate multiple time on same collection:
Thank you John - from you that means a lot. Speaking of meaning, are
you suggesting I better get moving on this? When you say move it to
the wiki do you mean I can go and set this up on the jq site?
On Aug 16, 8:45 pm, John Resig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Great work Mitch - if someone wants to
10:46 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
I like that, I like that alot!
On 8/17/07, John Resig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm all in favor of removing gt/lt/eq in favor
I'm all in favor of removing gt/lt/eq in favor of the selector version
with filter.
That was the original goal, but I actually decided to introduce an
array method into jQuery to solve that problem: .slice(). Now gt/lt/eq
will become:
gt: .slice(Num)
lt: .slice(0,Num)
eq: .slice(Num,1)
Plus
I like that, I like that alot!
On 8/17/07, John Resig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm all in favor of removing gt/lt/eq in favor of the selector version
with filter.
That was the original goal, but I actually decided to introduce an
array method into jQuery to solve that problem: .slice().
The only concern I have is that this could be yet another mysterious method
that someone might not know what it does. Will it work just lke javascript's
slice method?
Yes, of course - that's the only reason why I'm making this change.
--John
Then by all means...have at it.
-Original Message-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Resig
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2007 10:56 AM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses
I don't understand this argument at all. So this guy is proposing that
we change all the jQuery methods to:
$Array([array of elems])
$Selector(str)
$HTML(html)
$Element(DOMElement)
and:
.appendElement(DOMElement)
.appendHTML(html)
.appendArray([array of elems])
what on earth does that gain
On Aug 16, 7:39 pm, Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
quote
jQuery is definitely a popular utility function library, but the sheer
amount of dual/triple/quadruple special-case uses for both function
calls and method names is an instant turnoff for me.
This also turns me off to some degree. The
: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
I don't understand this argument at all. So this guy is proposing that we
change all the jQuery methods to:
$Array([array of elems])
$Selector(str)
$HTML(html)
$Element(DOMElement
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
I don't understand this argument at all. So this guy is proposing that we
change all the jQuery methods to:
$Array([array of elems
-
From: jquery-en@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of John Resig
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 1:48 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
Sure, that makes
@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of John Resig
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 12:53 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case uses for both function calls and method names
I don't understand
, 2007 12:53 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case uses for both function calls and method names
I don't understand this argument at all. So this guy is proposing
that
we change all the jQuery methods to:
$Array([array
: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
Andy,
I realize these are contrived examples, but if you're interested in seeing
what those selectors/traversal methods (e.g. :lt or .lt() ) can be used for,
here are a few links
@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
Andy,
I realize these are contrived examples, but if you're interested in seeing
what those selectors/traversal methods (e.g. :lt or .lt() ) can be used for,
here
]
On Behalf Of John Resig
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 12:53 PM
To: jquery-en@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case uses for both function calls and method names
I don't understand this argument at all. So this guy is proposing
that
we
]
*On Behalf Of *Karl Swedberg
*Sent:* Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:15 PM
*To:* jquery-en@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case uses for both function calls and method names
Andy,
I realize these are contrived examples, but if you're interested
@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
Sure, that makes sense - and it's obviously difficult. I think the
burden
may lie on us to write better examples - although, it's hard to think
On 8/16/07, Stephan Beal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 16, 7:39 pm, Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*snip*
Simon Willison apparently has a
similar hang-up about jQuery. And, like i am in my hate-hate
relationship with Python, he's in the minority.
Minor detail, it wasn't Simon
Knowing how to do it without jQuery makes me appreciate jQuery that much
more.
--
Brandon Aaron
On 8/16/07, Jonathan Sharp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/16/07, Stephan Beal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Aug 16, 7:39 pm, Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
*snip*
Simon Willison apparently
]
*On Behalf Of *Karl Swedberg
*Sent:* Thursday, August 16, 2007 2:15 PM
*To:* jquery-en@googlegroups.com
*Subject:* [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case uses for both function calls and method names
Andy,
I realize these are contrived examples
@googlegroups.com
Subject: [jQuery] Re: jQuery negatives: dual/triple/quadruple
special-case
uses for both function calls and method names
Sure, that makes sense - and it's obviously difficult. I think the
burden
may lie on us to write better examples - although, it's hard
I think this is a very stimulating topic - the responses have given me
a lot of insights to the frameworks of which jQuery belongs.
I see there are some big issues here that kind of scare me, the one
that stood out to me is the claim that jQurey is not for beginners who
don't know the DOM, CSS
Great work Mitch - if someone wants to beat me to you, you should move
this over to the wiki. I'll try to take a stab at it, if I can
remember.
--John
On 8/16/07, Mitch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think this is a very stimulating topic - the responses have given me
a lot of insights to the
29 matches
Mail list logo
