Thanks, Steve. Appreciate the compliment and advice. I do see a need for it, which is why I did it. Let's just hope the people who do have a say also see a need for it. Something like this is hard to have as 'just a plugin' because if it is ever used for general purpose plugin authoring, then it becomes a dependency, sort of like the Dimensions plugin.
Personally, I will never go back to the old way of writing plugins. Not because I wrote it (I'm not that stubborn ;) ), but because writing a plugin with an api of more than one method, either clutters the jQuery namespace, or becomes awkward to use. I just don't agree with passing a string argument as the first argument to the plugin- name. But I digress... Cheers, Trey On Mar 30, 4:27 pm, Steven Black <[email protected]> wrote: > You know, Trey, this jQuery plugin facade idea is very interesting and > I'm a little disappointed that it hasn't generated more discussion. > > That said, sometimes the greatest plugins suddenly appear from > nowhere, arriving in a nearly finished state. Pausing to float the > idea can kill momentum sometimes. > > My advice: "run with it". Just because others don't see it, or gloam > onto it, shouldn't be cause for pause. Genius is all about hitting > targets that others can't see. > > I think you're onto something. At minimum, it's apparently a very > straightforward way to create jQuery-chainable functions. Looking > past that, maybe this could be used to decorate existing plugins? > Maybe something along the lines of the (brilliant) jQuery-aop plugin > but with more straightforward access? I'm guessing. > > Run with it. > > **--** Steve > > On Mar 29, 7:23 pm, tres <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Nice one. > > > I think that would be good functionality to have. Feel free to mess > > with the source. If I get time I'll implement something and let you > > know. > > > Feel free to contact me via email. > > > -Trey > > > On Mar 28, 1:45 pm, Daniel Friesen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Bleh, I never noticed this one. > > > > The __load is actually there pretty much for completeness just to make > > > coding of plugins complete when we have __unload. Quite frankly __load > > > would probably be run right after you run addPlugin in your plugin's js. > > > The __unload would be run if someone decided to run > > > .removePlugin('yourName'); > > > > If really wanted we could actually set things up so you could unload a > > > plugin and reload it without running the actual plugin code. > > > > ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) > > > > tres wrote: > > > > I like where you are going with that. Please elaborate a bit on your > > > > idea of what would constitute loading and unloading. > > > > > Mike, where you been? > > > > > -Trey > > > > > On Mar 12, 9:11 am, Daniel Friesen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> After a bit of thought I just thought about one. > > > >> A __load and __unload for when the plugin is loaded and unloaded. This > > > >> will allow for the plugin to do extension type stuff and be able to > > > >> unload. > > > > >> Assuming jQuery.css.addHook and jQuery.css.removeHook for adding and > > > >> removing css hooks (an extensibility feature that ideally will get into > > > >> jQuery after John does his $.attr and $.curCSS refactor) > > > > >> (function(jQuery) { > > > > >> function cssCallback(elem, name, value, force) { > > > >> ... > > > > >> } > > > > >> jQuery.addPlugin('obscureCompat', { > > > >> __load: function() { > > > >> jQuery.css.addHook(cssCallback); > > > >> }, > > > >> __unload: function() { > > > >> jQuery.css.removeHook(cssCallback); > > > >> } > > > > >> }); > > > >> })(jQuery); > > > > >> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) > > > > >> tres wrote: > > > > >>> Thanks for the feedback, Daniel. > > > > >>> I see what you mean about jQuery.options instead of jQuery.fn.options. > > > >>> My reasoning for this, though, is by putting it on .fn you can assign > > > >>> different options to different elements instead of setting it globally > > > >>> for the plugin. This way options are persistent and can be changed on > > > >>> the fly. > > > > >>> I did think about giving the ability to assign a plugin to jQuery and > > > >>> not just jQuery.fn, but couldn't find a very graceful way to implement > > > >>> it as I just wanted to get the .fn working first. Could add a third, > > > >>> boolean, argument called addToFn and default it to true since it is > > > >>> the most likely case. > > > > >>> "Magic" methods can also be supported. Say you want to execute a > > > >>> function when the object is constructed, or when the options are > > > >>> changed. This isn't currently documented, but '__construct' works,and > > > >>> others would be fairly easy to implement. > > > > >>> Another idea would be to have an argument in jQuery.addPlugin to pass > > > >>> in an object of default options which would automatically apply > > > >>> options to the passed objects using jQuery.fn.options. > > > > >>> That said, I'm trying to keep a good balance of simplicity and > > > >>> extensibility, so more features isn't necessarily the right answer. > > > > >>> Anybody have anymore ideas or want to collaborate? > > > > >>> Thanks, > > > >>> -Trey > > > > >>> On Mar 5, 1:34 pm, Daniel Friesen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >>>> I think it could do with the ability to handle methods on jQuery > > > >>>> itself > > > >>>> instead of being limited to just jQuery.fn, perhaps a second > > > >>>> object/function to addPlugin; > > > > >>>> Likewise I'd prefer jQuery.options over jQuery.fn.options; > > > > >>>> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) > > > >>>> [http://nadir-seen-fire.com] > > > >>>> -Nadir-Point & Wiki-Tools (http://nadir-point.com) > > > >>>> (http://wiki-tools.com) > > > >>>> -MonkeyScript (http://monkeyscript.org) > > > >>>> -Animepedia (http://anime.wikia.com) > > > >>>> -Narutopedia (http://naruto.wikia.com) > > > >>>> -Soul Eater Wiki (http://souleater.wikia.com) > > > > >>>> [email protected] wrote: > > > > >>>>> There has been a lot of activity about plugin authoring and how it > > > >>>>> can > > > >>>>> be more structured and extensible. I've posted a couple of comments > > > >>>>> on > > > >>>>> some threads and sent an email to John, but I thought I'd create a > > > >>>>> new > > > >>>>> thread since I haven't had any feedback yet. John, I understand you > > > >>>>> probably get a lot of email and are very busy. > > > > >>>>> I've written a plugin that I'd like to get feedback on from you > > > >>>>> guys. > > > >>>>> It's still evolving, but should be stable in what it currently is > > > >>>>> designed to do and I have found it invaluable when authoring larger, > > > >>>>> more advanced plugins. It would be nice to see similar functionality > > > >>>>> built into jQuery as I think others would also find it useful. > > > > >>>>> Link:http://plugins.jquery.com/project/plugin-authoring > > > > >>>>> Cheers, > > > >>>>> Trey --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
