Yes, that was left-over code from looking at implementing this feature in a different way (removed now, thanks). We are definitely looking into what it would take to bring this functionality to other methods within the library that use callbacks but wanted to go ahead and get this applied for events due to its popularity. -- Brandon Aaron
On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:53 PM, Balazs Endresz <[email protected]>wrote: > > I've just had a look at r6344 and there seems to be an extra argument > in jQuery.event.add but that function hasn't been modified (yet?). > And maybe it's been mentioned before but if you're really adding this > feature why not do the same with $.each? Hopefully no one uses the > internal `args` argument and it would be at least as useful as for > events. > > On May 5, 3:44 pm, Brandon Aaron <[email protected]> wrote: > > How about "thisObject"? Taken from Mozilla's docs for the forEach method > (https://developer.mozilla.org/En/Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference:Object... > ). > > -- > > Brandon Aaron > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Michael Geary <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I don't find this feature all that useful myself, since my callback > > > functions tend to be a mix of jQuery/DOM, setTimeout, Google > Maps/Earth, > > > and > > > other asynchronous APIs. If I can only bind an object to a callback in > one > > > of those types of APIs and not the others - or if they each sprout > > > independent ways of doing it - I may as well just use a closure so I > have > > > one way to handle them all. > > > > > But I've seen that a lot of people do like this capability, so I > certainly > > > don't object to it, unless of course it slows down my own code. > > > > > My one request: please do not call it "scope"! Not in the code, not in > the > > > comments, and not in the docs. > > > > > JavaScript has something called scope, and you create it by nesting > > > functions lexically (or using the "with" statement). Setting the "this" > > > value for an event or other callback isn't related in the slightest to > > > scope. > > > > > If you need a name for the concept, you could describe it as "binding > an > > > object to the event handler" or - probably better - "calling the event > > > handler as a method of an object". I don't know of a short and sweet > word > > > for it, but "scope" is already taken. :-) > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > -Mike > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
