jQuery 1.5.1 testing

John Kremer jkkremer at gmail.com
Mon Mar 21 22:41:49 UTC 2011


Hey Colin,

Thanks for the details. I will check them out tomorrow when I get in and
write up and run some more tests to see if that may solve the problem.

John

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:51 PM, Colin Clark <colinbdclark at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Thanks for the detective work. There's a function in DataBinding.js,
> fluid.value(), which advertises itself as a "generalization" of
> jQuery.val(). Does it pass your tests? And if so, do you think fluid.value()
> is a suitable replacement for jQuery.val() in the places where we're
> currently seeing regressions?
>
> If so, maybe can promote it to the core Fluid.js file and just never use
> jQuery.val() again.
>
> Too bad jQuery broke the contract on val() and filed it "won't fix." :(
>
> Colin
>
> On 2011-03-21, at 5:27 PM, John Kremer wrote:
>
> > Just wrote a few jQuery 1.5.1 tests for .val():
> >
> >  var test_value = "abc";
> >            jqUnit.assertEquals("Testing textbox value", test_value,
> $("#textbox-with-value").val());
> >            jqUnit.assertEquals("Testing textbox value", test_value,
> $("#textbox-with-value").val(undefined));
> >            jqUnit.assertEquals("Testing textbox value", test_value,
> $("#textbox-with-value").val(""));
> >         });
> >
> > The only passing test is the top one, and passing a falsy returns the
> jQuery object as oppose to the value of the object.
> >
> > There are many tests that are failing in the migration over to 1.5.1 due
> to this issue.
> >
> > https://github.com/jkkremer/infusion/tree/FLUID-4113
> >
> https://github.com/jkkremer/infusion/commit/39a684870854dfe205f8a6589b2c1526aba47697
>
>
> ---
> Colin Clark
> Technical Lead, Fluid Project
> http://fluidproject.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://fluidproject.org/pipermail/fluid-work/attachments/20110321/53061d9c/attachment.html>


More information about the fluid-work mailing list