Brandon Aaron schrieb:
> ** Going to re-read to make sure I'm not complete off-base **
>
> Okay ... so after re-reading I think that Jörn's first idea is the
> better one than the other suggestions. My only concern is that it
> changes the behavior of the is method. I still think making this its
> own method is the best option.
>
> With that said I think either modifying the is method, not method or
> *preferably* adding a new method with this simple syntax will be very
> useful!
>   
The modification to is() won't break any existing code that uses is() as 
documented (with only one paramter).
But before closing this topic: Could you please have a look at the other 
solution to this: http://jquery.com/discuss/2006-October/012969/
This avoids the anonymous functions, but it's use is limited to jQuery 
methods.

-- Jörn

_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
[email protected]
http://jquery.com/discuss/

Reply via email to