Sizzle searches over nodes already present in the document.
If I create a div inside whatever function thanks gosh Sizzle won't return
that div in a search $("div"), do you follow me?
I know you simply brought here yet another inconsistency in the browsers
panorama, but to fix this doubtfully useful operation which logically does
not make sense I would go for the other way .... if(!node.parentNode)return
null;
To have a computed style for a not in DOM element you need to append it,
retrieve the style, remove the node ... no way, since this is gonna be a
performances killer and we all take care about performances, don't we?
Regards
On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 10:14 AM, DBJDBJ <dbj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> @Andrea : thanks for normal tone, but again somehow you fundamentaly
> misunderstood me ? If anything you (probably) followed my code
> through ;o)
>
> One of the strengths of jQuery is: It smooths the sharply uneven
> surface of cross browser javascript.
> If I post something that does not mean I want to do it that way and no
> other way.
> I simply stumbled upon this issue which , I thought, might be
> interesting for the jQ team, because this is yet another "feature"
> that works in some browsers and does not work in others.
> 99% of jQuery are much more concerned to have code that works and that
> uses jQuery, than to engage in W3C spec minutiae...
>
> My example/finding uses somewhat esoteric code, but the issue of
> CHROME not allowing getComputedStyle() on non-attached new elements,
> might break some other part of Sizzle or jQ core, so I thought I
> report it...
>
> --DBJ
>
> On Oct 24, 1:23 am, Andrea Giammarchi <andrea.giammar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:22 AM, DBJDBJ <dbj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Well for the FF team this was not meaningless, since it is possible to
> > > set/get css value on the non-attached newly created dom element in FF
> > > and then get to it through getComputedStyle()
> > > You just have to follow in the Firebug and Chrome console, what I have
> > > posted initally. Instead of "wondering" ...
> >
> > DBJ it does not matter what an engine does internally, it maters why on
> > earth you would ask for a Computed property when this has never been
> > computed ... this would be normal for a JScript engine, not SpiderMonkey
> or
> > V8 where performances should be a priority.
> >
> > Accordingly, I would rather ask Firefox (or Firebug plug-in) or Chrome
> why
> > they provide such information for an element has never been rendered
> since
> > from *Computation* point of view this is the real waste of time/resurces
> and
> > probablythe reason Firefox 3.5 is so slow with DOM render compared even
> with
> > Internet Explorer.
> >
> > It's nice in any case to see how you trust "applications" more than logic
> > ... do you agree that a picture could never be showed if that fact never
> > happened?
> >
> > Regards
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-dev@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
jquery-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jquery-dev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
