On 02/10/06, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I like that. You could then use it like this:
> > $(...).ifelse(':visible', ifCallback).doOtherStuff();
> > $(...).ifelse(':visible', ifCallback, elseCallback).doOtherStuff();
> > $(...).ifelse(':visible', null, elseCallback).doOtherStuff();
> >
> > I'll put that in, if noone objects :-)
>
> FYI, you can already call an extra Function argument on any
> destructive operation, for example:
>
> .find( "foo", ifCallback )
> .filter( "foo", ifCallback )
> .not( "foo", ifCallback )
> etc. etc.
>
> I didn't document this yet, since I didn't think anyone was going to
> care to use it, except for me. Heh.
>
> Since there's already an ifCallback for all those functions, adding in
> an optional elseCallback wouldn't be "that bad" and would probably be
> preferrable to adding a new .ifelse() function. What's everyone's
> thoughts on this?
>
> --JohnI would prefer that (extending existing functions) to having ifelse (which could always be done as an extension anyway). _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
