On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wouldn't it be more convenient if the syntactic-sugar-free version of
> Element's methods were "null-proof safe"
No, that would encourage incredibly bad practices and also make
tracking down errors with non-existent elements quite difficult to
track down.
If you want to do it with a one-liner, invoke is null-safe:
$$('#pleaseWait').invoke('hide');
-justin
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" 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/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
