First, $$().<anymethod> iterates over the collection anyway, so using .each
(or some other iterator) isn't going to slow anything down.
Secondly, the "this" keyword can get very confusing in code, and I try to
make my code easy (for myself and others) to read. If I have a reference to
something already (your $$(someClass) collects DOM elements) I'm more
inclined to reuse that reference if I can. Avoiding the need to make a
reference to *this* to keep it straight is something that feels, to me, a
little hacky. Not a lot hacky, but a little hacky.
The way I expressed the example above is how I would write it. I only use
the $$().<somemethod> shortcut when I have very concise things to express.
So, for example, I'll do:
$$('div.foo').hide(); //hide is a shortcut I define in the Clientside libs
but I'm a little less likely to do something that's more complex than that.
Frankly, I don't use that shortcut method ($$().foo...) often because it's a
little to easy to accidentally come back and chain something else to it:
$$('div.foo').hide().addClass('bar'); //this iterates twice
So as I said before, the way you were solving the problem is not a bad way
to do it, but it's not how I would. Whenever binding is needed, I try and be
as clear as I can what *this* is. Especially when I'm writing a class.
Whenever possible, *this* in my classes is always the instance of that
class.
VirtuosiMedia wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for the quick reply. Just for clarification, if you have a
> moment, could you perhaps explain why you would choose to iterate over
> the elements rather than use a proxy variable? In my example, I'm
> assuming that the iteration is implied, so it essentially does the
> same thing as what you wrote, but it seems like it saves a line of
> code. If the event were 'mouseover' rather than 'click' and you need
> to have something similar for 'mouseout', you could save two lines. Do
> you feel like it's more readable to explicitly iterate? I'm not too
> familiar on conventions, etc, so I'm genuinely curious. Thanks again.
>
> On Sep 17, 3:16 pm, nutron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> In this particular instance, I'd iterate over the elements instead:
>>
>> $$(someClass).each(function(el) {
>> el.addEvent('click', function(){
>> el.addClass('someOtherClass');
>> this.someFunction();
>> }.bind(this));
>>
>> }, this);
>>
>> It's not bad form to make a reference to this into another variable name
>> (as
>> you have in your example) but I find it's rarely needed. In all the code
>> I've written for the Clientside libraries, I can't think of an instance
>> where I've had to do it. If so, it's only once or twice.
>>
>>
>>
>> VirtuosiMedia wrote:
>>
>> > Is there a better way to do have multiple 'this' references inside an
>> > addEvent function? Right now I'm using a variable called thisProxy to
>> > refer the global this and the this inside the function will refer to
>> > that instance. I don't want to use bind because I need them both. Is
>> > there a more elegant method?
>>
>> > Here's an example:
>>
>> > var thisProxy = this;
>>
>> > $$(someClass).addEvent('click', function(){
>> > this.addClass('someOtherClass');
>> > thisProxy.someFunction();
>> > });
>>
>> -----
>> The MooTools Tutorial: http://www.mootorial.comwww.mootorial.com
>> CNET Clientside: http://clientside.cnet.comclientside.cnet.com
>> --
>> View this message in
>> context:http://n2.nabble.com/Multiple-this-references-inside-the-addEvent-fun...
>> Sent from the MooTools Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>
-----
The MooTools Tutorial: http://www.mootorial.com www.mootorial.com
CNET Clientside: http://clientside.cnet.com clientside.cnet.com
--
View this message in context:
http://n2.nabble.com/Multiple-this-references-inside-the-addEvent-function-tp1096709p1096823.html
Sent from the MooTools Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
