John,
Thinking about it again, would it make sense to decouple DOM removal
from element death? This could help you speed up not only
$.fn.replaceWith, but also $.fn.empty and everything that uses it
(including $.fn.html and $.fn.text), with something like this:
function kill() {
jQuery.event.remove( this );
jQuery.removeData( this );
};
jQuery.each({
remove: function( selector ) {
if ( !selector || jQuery.filter( selector, [ this ] ).length ) {
jQuery( "*", this ).add([this]).each( kill );
if (this.parentNode)
this.parentNode.removeChild( this );
}
},
empty: function() {
jQuery( ">*", this ).each( kill );
this.innerHTML = ""; // or whatever is fastest
}
}, function(name, fn){
jQuery.fn[ name ] = function(){
return this.each( fn, arguments );
};
});
$.fn.extend({
replaceWith: function() {
this.find( "*" ).add([this]).each( kill );
return this.domManip(arguments, false, function(elem){
this.parentNode.replaceChild( elem, this );
})
}
});
Jed
On Jan 19, 5:09 pm, Jed Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ah, I suspected there might be something like that.
>
> 1.3 is great, keep up the good work!
>
> Jed
>
> On Jan 19, 5:02 pm, John Resig <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I like it - but the one tricky part is that .remove() is actually
> > functional beyond the simple .removeChild() call - it also removes any
> > bound event handlers and bound data from the elements (which is
> > something that this modified replaceWith would not do). That
> > functionality would need to stay intact (this is the same reason why
> > we do .empty().append() in .html() instead of using a straight
> > innerHTML).
>
> > --John
>
> > On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 7:49 PM, Jed Schmidt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Hey all,
>
> > > Looking at the new source code for 1.3, I was wondering why jQuery
> > > doesn't take advantage of the native replaceChild method in the W3C
> > > core. Currently, jQuery implements replaceWith using append and
> > > remove, but since replaceChild is well supported[1] across browsers,
> > > it seems like a safe place to optimize performance, since it reduces
> > > two in-place DOM operations with one.
>
> > > So I replaced this on line 487 in 1.3:
>
> > > replaceWith: function( value ) {
> > > return this.after( value ).remove();
> > > },
>
> > > with this:
>
> > > replaceWith: function() {
> > > return this.domManip(arguments, false, function(elem){
> > > this.parentNode.replaceChild( elem, this );
> > > });
> > > },
>
> > > and put together a before[2] and after[3] page.
>
> > > On OS 10.5.6, Firefox 3.0.5 went from an average of 1239ms to 935ms,
> > > and Safari 3.2.1 went from an average of 421ms to 331ms.
>
> > > What do you guys think?
>
> > > Jed Schmidt
>
> > > [1]http://www.quirksmode.org/dom/w3c_core.html
> > > [2]http://s3.amazonaws.com/replacewith/before.html
> > > [3]http://s3.amazonaws.com/replacewith/after.html
>
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
