Ah, the chainability paradigm. That makes perfect sense. The language doesn't care if you are referencing an array of differently typed objects or a specific object, so I guess that strong typing is ruled out.
I really like jQueryMobile, but it can be a huge PITA trying to find the accessors for some some of the widget properties. On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Kevin Newman <[email protected]> wrote: > That's an architectural quirk of jQuery - it's their whole chainability > paradigm - everything returns a configured instance of jQuery. > > It works well in JavaScript, but I can see how it wouldn't work well in a > typed languge. That said, jQuery's chainability paradigm is not my favorite, > even in javascript. I often feel like all I really need from jQuery is > Sizzle (the selector engine it's based on), and some of the compatibility > shims it contains (event normalization). > > Kevin N. > > > > On 12/2/11 8:10 AM, Andrew Sinning wrote: >> >> What I don't like about the haXe-jQuery API is that every object has >> type "JQuery". It seems to be it would be much programmer-friendly if >> there were sub-classes for the individual elements. Imagine if in AS3 >> you could never specify any display object to be anything more >> specific than a Sprite or an Object. > > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders -- Andrew Sinning LearningWare Engineer Desk: 651-289-7373 Cell: 612-296-3646 _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
