Yes, $('nonexistent-selector') works, but seems very inelegant. I think $([])
is the best solution, but I'd like to hear from the gurus. How much code
depends on $() referring to document?Sam Collett wrote: > > On 16/02/07, Danny Wachsstock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> I've been using jQuery for a few months now, trying to convert all my >> hand-rolled javascript and came across a minor problem that I could not >> find >> documented anywhere: >> I want to create DOM elements and add them into a jQuery object, as in; >> >> var result = [empty jQuery object]; >> $.each(... >> var element = ...; >> result.add(element); >> ); >> >> But how to create an empty jQuery? Scouring the source code, I eventually >> hit upon $([]), but this is nowhere documented. Is there a better way? >> Is there a good reason $() should return $(document) rather than an empty >> jQuery? >> >> Daniel Wachsstock >> http://youngisrael-stl.org >> >> -- > > I found that out the hard way as well, so perhaps it should be > documented. I think searching for a class that does not exist ( > $("atag.nonexistentclass") ) will also return an empty jQuery object. > > As for changing $() to not return $(document), that may be a bad idea > as it helps reduce the amount of code to write, plus may break some > plugins. > > _______________________________________________ > jQuery mailing list > [email protected] > http://jquery.com/discuss/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Creating-an-empty-jQuery-object-tf3240592.html#a9010063 Sent from the JQuery mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ jQuery mailing list [email protected] http://jquery.com/discuss/
