* Dave Methvin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-11-30 17:10]:
> This will be a short thread--NOT! :-)
>
> > Controller set of methods is returned..
> >
> > $('#grid').grid().data(data).drig().show()
> > $('#grid').grid().scrollToRow(6).drig().css("border", "1px")
>
> Uh, drig()? So if I want to return to I was before scrollToRow(6), should I
> use (6)woRoTllorsc? ;-)
This is indeed the implementation. Somewhere else, I suggeted using
jQuery to return to the jQuery method chain.
$('div.grid').grid()
.columns(2, 3, 4).select().grid()
.rowHeight(22)
.jQuery().show()
Now it would be possible to perform the above on every grid in the
document, using method chaining.
> I don't know if this a good idiom; changing the object type within the chain
> might be be too tricky.
It might be too tricky as a one off, but if it becomes a convention,
then I don't think it will be so tricky.
There are a few tricky things about jQuery already...
$('#e').css('height', '100px').scrollTop = 20
...really needs to be...
$('#e').css('height', '100px').get(0).scrollTop = 20
...or...
$('#e').css('height', '100px').each(funciton () { this.scrollTop = 20 })
...or maybe not chained at all.
If chaining is a convention, then chain switching could also be a
convention.
> Also, would the plugin itself have a need for chained methods to
> change its internal state? Still, to make your object chainable
> like that, I think your $().grid method would just need to save
> its jQuery "this" in your Grid object before returning:
> jQuery.fn.grid = function() {
> var gridObject = // ... get your grid object ...
> gridObject.jQuery = this;
> return gridObject;
> }
> jQuery.fn.drig = function() {
> return this.jQuery;
> }
This is how I'd propose it would be implemented.
> As Jörn mentioned, you could still use $("#grid").grid() to create and/or
> retrieve a Grid object, even if it wasn't chainable. It seems like you'd
> want some way to determine whether it was a Grid creation or just getting an
> existing object; you could have a separate $().createGrid() method or maybe
> the $().grid() argument could be required on creation. (Also, should the
> core should a standard way for plugins to associate object data with an
> element, like it does with events?)
I'm using something along these lines...
if (!Acme) var Acme = {}
Acme.Grids = {}
Acme.NextGrid = 1
Acme.GridBuilder = function (jQuery, options) {
this.jQuery = jQuery
this.options = options
}
Acme.GridBuilder.prototype = {
rowHieght: function (height) {
jQuery.each(function() {
var options = Acme.Grids[this.AcmeGridID]
options.height = height
})
},
render() {
// long and complicated...
},
jQuery: function() {
this.render()
return this.jQuery
}
}
jQuery.fn.grid = function () {
this.each(function () {
if (!this.AcmeGridID) {
this.AcmeGridID = 'G' + (Acme.NextGrid++)
Acme.Grids[this.AcmeGridID] = {}
}
})
return new GridBuilder(this)
}
...and so, grid() creates if not already created.
> Whatever results from this discussion should go to the plugins authoring
> page on the wiki, http://jquery.com/plugins/Authoring/
If it becomes a convention then I don't think that it's going to be
to difficult to say that the method switches chains, and termiantes
with so and so, and this creates a convention for both storing data
and resettting properties.
--
Alan Gutierrez - 504 717 1428 - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://blogometer.com/
Think New Orleans - http://thinknola.com/
_______________________________________________
jQuery mailing list
[email protected]
http://jquery.com/discuss/
