IE8? obviously no, how can you pretend a browser that implemented
defineProperty only for Window and DOM can be "so advanced" with other
native constructors? :D
Anyway, the most legacy like forEach is something like this:
Array.forEach = Array.forEach || function(obj, callback, scope){
for(var
length = obj.length,
i = 0;
i < length;
++i
){
if(i in obj){ // forEach does not loop over undefined indexes
callback.call(scope, obj[i], i, obj);
// the callback could have changed the Array/collection
length = obj.length;
};
};
};
Best regards,
Andrea Giammarchi
On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:11 PM, diogobaeder <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hmmm... close, I agree, but still not cross-browser compliant... ;-)
>
> Question: does IE8 support these methods (abstract and instance)
> natively?
>
> Diogo
>
>
>
> On May 20, 3:37 pm, Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > P.S. Array.forEach is standard in FireFox and some other browser, so it
> is
> > still native one
> >
> > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 7:36 PM, Andrea Giammarchi <
> >
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > jQuery.forEach = Array.forEach || function(){ ... }
> >
> > > now you are close to vice-versa logic, where you can simply use
> > > Array.forEach with every array like variable, DOM colelctions included
> ;-)
> >
> > > On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:39 PM, diogobaeder <[email protected]
> >wrote:
> >
> > >> Hmmm... almost there, in my opinion, Andrea... I think it could be
> > >> used in the main jQuery object (singleton), also, to minimize browser
> > >> dependance, if the user wants to use it with normal Array objects...
> > >> like:
> >
> > >> jQuery.forEach(myArrayObject, , myCallback, myContext);
> >
> > >> What do you think? This way, the client code can use it both with
> > >> Array objects and jQuery wrapped DOM objects...
> >
> > >> Diogo
> >
> > >> On May 20, 3:35 am, Andrea Giammarchi <[email protected]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> > JQuery.fn.forEach = Array.prototype.forEach || function(){ ... };
> easy?
> > >> :-)
> >
> > >> > On May 20, 2009 3:07 AM, "diogobaeder" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> > Matt,
> >
> > >> > I think your approach is usefull only if one wants to create a new
> > >> > jQuery method... because checking everytime if forEach method exists
> > >> > is not easily maintainable...
> >
> > >> > Maybe it could be a $.forEach, applying the Mozilla implementation
> if
> > >> > the browser doesn't support the method... what do you guys think of
> > >> > it?
> >
> > >> > Diogo
> >
> > >> > On May 19, 11:29 am, Matt Kruse <[email protected]> wrote: >
> On
> > >> May
> > >> > 19, 9:19 am, diogobaede...
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
