[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
Hey, Ben Nolan a écrit : >> I think it would be helpful if the documentation for >> Form.Element.getValue() made it clear that the argument refers to an >> id, not a form value's name. (Actually, come to think of it, would >> there be any issue with changing the behaviour of $F() to more closely >> match $() so that a null is returned if no such element exists, >> instead of bombing out?) The doc is now more explicit. I also submitted #8381 [1] proposing a null result for unknown IDs, or IDs of unsupported elements. [1] http://dev.rubyonrails.org/ticket/8381 -- Christophe Porteneuve aka TDD [EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
Is Form.Element.setValue going to added to next version of Prototype?
$F('name', value) would be very slick.
It would make sense for a 'getter' to have a corresponding 'setter'.
On May 16, 9:47 am, Tobie Langel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Those who like $F (like me) will continue to use it even when it's removed -
>
> ;)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
On 5/16/07, Jacob Rockowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Is Form.Element.setValue going to added to next version of Prototype? Yes. The implementation and unit tests are in place in the form branch. But, we only announce things when they land in the trunk. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
> Those who like $F (like me) will continue to use it even when it's removed - ;) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
On 5/16/07, Tobie Langel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> There are rumors of a probable deprecation of $F... So use $
> (element).getValue() instead.
Those who like $F (like me) will continue to use it even when it's removed -
especially the new $F with setter capabilities in the form branch [*]:
$F('name', 'Mislav')
Michael, Christophe already fixed the docs. I updated them after that to be
less scary (all those warnings and exclamations made it sound like something
dangerous is happening here) and more helpful:
http://prototypejs.org/api/form/element/getValue
We may even install bomb prevention following the Michael's suggestion.
Anyone sees a problem with this? Should the bomb better be left armed so not
to confuse users when debugging an error in their code?
--
[*]
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/browser/spinoffs/prototype/branches/form/src/form.js?rev=6530#L188
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype: Core" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
There are rumors of a probable deprecation of $F... So use $ (element).getValue() instead. -- tobie --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Prototype-core] Re: documentation suggestion for $F()/Form.Element.getValue()
+1 On 5/16/07, Michael Stillwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think it would be helpful if the documentation for > Form.Element.getValue() made it clear that the argument refers to an > id, not a form value's name. (Actually, come to think of it, would > there be any issue with changing the behaviour of $F() to more closely > match $() so that a null is returned if no such element exists, > instead of bombing out?) > > See > > http://www.prototypejs.org/api/form/element/getValue > > > > > --M. > > > > > -- Regards, Ben Nolan Moso Interactive skype: bennolan cell: +49 1577 383 7542 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prototype: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to prototype-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-core?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
