I too feel relying on a function.prototype.bind implementation would
be the most forward looking but I'm not sure that jives with the
general approach of jQuery:
jQuery doesn't extend Native.prototype.anything.
On Dec 29, 1:12 am, Daniel Friesen <nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Rick Waldron wrote:
> > Available, as in the "scope" argument is being retrofitted to an
> > existing function, and ONLY to that function.
>
> > I don't get what you are talking about a fn.bind() implementation in
> > jQuery, or what you mean by available in just one function though.
>
> > Read ES5.
>
> > function.prototype.bind()
>
> I already read ES5, I use portions of ES5 in a number of js server-based
> projects already.
>
> However I don't get "ONLY" one function, since the whole point of
> .bind() is to bind a `this` onto ONE function with one call. It's not
> bind otherwise.
>
> So I don't see any limitation. Unless you are under the
> misinterpretation that after you have called .bind() on one function you
> have modified that function and bound it's `this`. .bind() doesn't
> modify the function, it returns a new one.
> From ES5 15.3.4.5 Function.prototype.bind> The bind method takes one or more
> arguments, thisArg and (optionally)
> > arg1, arg2, etc, and returns a *new*
> > function object by performing the following steps:
>
> So this is valid ES5 code.
>
> "use strict";
> var a = function() { alert(this); };
> var a1 = a.bind("a");
> var a2 = a.bind("b");
>
> a(); // Alerts undefined
> a1(); // Alerts "a"
> a2(); // Alerts "b"
>
>
>
> > On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 7:43 PM, Daniel Friesen
> > <nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com <mailto:nadir.seen.f...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> > I made a post about how confusing people may find the name bind some
> > time ago. Suggested renaming bind to something like event, and keeping
> > bind as an alias of course. That was rejected.
>
> > I don't get what you are talking about a fn.bind() implementation in
> > jQuery, or what you mean by available in just one function though.
>
> > ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire)
> > [http://daniel.friesen.name]
>
> > Rick Waldron wrote:
> > > John,
>
> > > While I'm glad to see a scope arg available, i still think this is
> > > negligent to the future of jQuery and ES standards. I really think a
> > > fn.bind() implementation would ideal (since it would be jQuery-wide
> > > and not just available in one function), but as I've noted in
> > the past
> > > and is exampled here, beginners may find this syntax a bit boggling:
>
> > > $(foo).bind('event', fn.bind(bar) );
>
> > > Rick
>
> ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
--
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=en.
