>> $(...).onclick().toggle().end();
This will be cool John...
I have so many one-liner anonymous functions that i can get rid of then...
When can we expect it.?
-GTG
On 8/17/07, John Resig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> I've thought of this, as well. I also wanted to add a hook to allow:
>
> $(...).click(".toggle()")
>
> However, I'm currently leaning away from it (embedding code in strings
> is messy) in favor of another solution that I'm working on:
>
> $(...).onclick().toggle().end();
>
> Removing the need for anonymous functions entirely.
>
> --John
>
> On 8/17/07, Matt Kruse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Assigning event functions like click() require an anonymous function
> > for what is often a very small snippet of code. These anonymous
> > functions are confusing to inexperienced javascript coders and make
> > the code less readable, IMO.
> >
> > I think it would be great to be able to pass a string to these
> > functions and have it internally turned into a function.
> >
> > For example, instead of this:
> > $('#test').click(function() { alert('test'); });
> >
> > I want to do this:
> > $('#test').click("alert('test');");
> >
> > This simple code change seems to do the job:
> > // Handle event binding
> > jQuery.fn[o] = function(f){
> > return f ? this.bind(o, ((typeof f=="string")?Function(f):f)) :
> > this.trigger(o);
> > };
> >
> > Is it possible to change jQuery to accept a string in addition to a
> > function reference where possible? Although you would lose the
> > potential benefit of the closure by passing a string, you could always
> > pass the function ref instead if you needed to.
> >
> > Matt Kruse
> >
> >
>
