Search jQuery

jQuery Forum

Using jQuery

speedpack..

Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

in Using jQuery • 5 years ago

Hello again,

Please do not take this the wrong way, but rather as a genuine question I have.

I do not want to be negative, but the answer to our bug report http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/9611 did amaze me a bit.

One of the main reasons we turned to a javascript framework (we used to use prototype before we - thankfully - migrated to jQuery), is that we wouldn't need to worry about browsers and versions our users use.

Unfortunately, if you look at http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/9611, I now notice that I can not rely on jQuery framework for making functions work cross-browser.

In my opinion, if there is an issue with this, shouldn't jQuery intercept and wrap the call to something that does work in Webkit?

Again - this is not meant to be negative, but as an end-developer, I think I should be able to rely on same behaviour of all methods provided in the jQuery library, regardless of what browser/version is being used. (or perhaps at least document it in the api docs?)

What do you guys think?

---
http://www.flexin.be

Replies(6)

Kevin B

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

That method is being provided by the Sizzle CSS Selector Engine.

The Sizzle CSS Selector Engine tries to figure out the fastest way to select elements based on the given selector. When it comes to css3 selectors such as :nth-child(), :last-child, :only-child etc. the Sizzle engine uses the browser's native selector if it exists, else it uses the fallback method.

Since the bug is in the browser's :nth-child selector, the correct way of handling it would be to report the bug to the browser's community. Then, if they aren't able to provide a fix in a timely fashion, consider implementing a fix in the library. In this case "[the dev team] cannot come up with a tenable, non-invasive solution." - ajpiano.

Here's another bug report for the same bug, with a response that may make more sense.

http://bugs.jquery.com/ticket/5664

-- Kevin

speedpack..

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

Hi Kevin,

Thanks very much for the reply. As I already stated - I did not want to sound negative, and I understand it 100%. My only frustration was that I believed that there would always be a fallback method...

Again - I understand - I was just surprised that this was the case.

---
http://www.flexin.be

charlietfl

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

there is a simple fallback use eq()...less code, easier to read

http://api.jquery.com/eq/

speedpack..

Re: Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

I agree.. We just used the :nth-child selector because we had one large selector; changing it to eq is an option, but was - in our particular case - more code, as we had to change $('tr td:nth-child(4) select option:nth-child(2)) to $('tr td).eq(3).children('select option').eq(1), which, in some particular cases became longer - it's the only reason we used nth selector, but changing it all to .eq() usage did indeed fix our problem :)

Thanks!

David.

---
http://www.flexin.be

charlietfl

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

apart from eq() method there is also an ":eq()" selector which would reduce need for some of your children()

speedpack..

Re: Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

5 years ago

thanks for pointing that out!!! now, where is that +1 button from google plus? :)

---
http://www.flexin.be

Top Reply

Response title

Attachments

jQuery Forum

Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Replies(6)

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Re: Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Re: Re: Is jQuery supposed to be a transparent layer between us developers and the different browsers and versions out there?

Statistics

Tags

Actions