Here's my minified version... it's *slightly* larger at 209 characters
(vs 195), but it works, and bonus, it doesn't use a memory-leaky named-
function-expression:
(function(a,b,c,d){if(a[b]==null&&a[c]){a[c](d,function()
{a.removeEventListener(d,arguments.callee,false);a[b]
="complete"},false);a[b]="loading"}})
(document,"readyState","addEventListener","DOMContentLoaded");
Thanks for the inspiration, though, Andrea!
--Kyle
On Nov 18, 5:55 pm, Shade <get...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ummm... ammendment: The complete snippet works:
>
> if(document.readyState == null && document.addEventListener){
> // on DOMContentLoaded event, supported since ages
> document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function
> DOMContentLoaded(){
> // remove the listener itself
> document.removeEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",
> DOMContentLoaded, false);
> // assign readyState as complete
> document.readyState = "complete";
> }, false);
> // set readyState = loading or interactive
> // it does not really matter for this purpose
> document.readyState = "loading";
>
> }
>
> But, the minified/re-arranged snippet (the 195 chars) Andrea provided
> does not work. Do you own minification and you'll be fine, just don't
> use what he posted.
>
> --Kyle
>
> On Nov 18, 5:44 pm, Shade <get...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I have confirmed in this test:
>
> >http://test.getify.com/archive/dynloadjquery/index6.html
>
> > ...that Andrea's proposed snippet does in fact "patch a page" to have
> > a proper readyState, assuming of course the snippet itself is
> > guaranteed to run before domready. The test includes it in a manual
> > script tag at the bottom of the page, and then you can click a button
> > to dynamically load jquery into the page, then click the other button
> > to see if jquery's internal ready flag is set properly or not.
>
> > I used a patched version of jQuery 1.3.2 (1.3.2.1 I called it) which
> > only has the changes to the bindReady() function as they appear in
> > GitHub right now (namely, the additional check for the
> > document.readyState which John landed as a result of that previous bug
> > I linked to earlier in this thread).
>
> > I tested this just now in both FF3 and 3.5 (both windows), and it
> > works fine.
>
> > That means, that at least for now, even though patching jquery itself
> > doesn't do much or help anything with the problem of being able to
> > lazy-load jquery core, which my biggest concern/use-case, you can
> > still "patch" a page to be able to lazy-load jquery. That's definitely
> > an improvement.
>
> > It also means that any code that relies on jquery's test (such as code
> > that uses document.ready) is now also safe to lazy load right along
> > with jquery core itself, as long as doing so in a "patched" page.
>
> > I'm satisfied that this being included in LABjs will allow users to
> > adequately load jquery.js on-demand without fear of the isReady checks
> > failing later. The only caveat then will be that LABjs has to make
> > sure it's there before dom-ready, but for all the use cases I care
> > about, it's quite unlikely that people will use some other loading
> > technique to lazy-load the Loader itself.
>
> > --Kyle
>
> > On Nov 18, 5:03 pm, Már Örlygsson <mar.orlygs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Am I right to think that there's a similar problem with the
> > > window.onload event?
> > > i.e. if you're too late in binding a handler to window.onload, it will
> > > never fire?
>
> > > --
> > > Már- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jQuery Development" group.
To post to this group, send email to jquery-...@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=.
