jQuery-Lint is attempting to (re)validate the jQuery object?

[erikstainsby]

It seems a complete waste of cycles for Lint to be scanning and judging jQuery itself. In the first place, it will be endlessly exhausting for you to try to keep up to date with the modifications in each new jQuery release; in the second case, it is simply rude to judge your parents [ ;) ]

The following is a few lines from the top of a very very long list of similar reports which are fundamentally wrong. jQuery does allow $.extend( target, [object1], [objectN] ) ~ the only required parameter being the first one.

This is a direct lift from api.jquery.com:

When we supply two or more objects to $.extend(), properties from all of the objects are added to the target object.

If only one argument is supplied to $.extend(), this means the target argument was omitted. In this case, the jQuery object itself is assumed to be the target. By doing this, we can add new functions to the jQuery namespace. This can be useful for plugin authors wishing to add new methods to JQuery.

Keep in mind that the target object (first argument) will be modified, and will also be returned from $.extend(). If, however, we want to preserve both of the original objects, we can do so by passing an empty object as the target.

Here's is the jQuery-Lint output.

I have my log buffer set to 2k lines, and it fills completely with loops on this error. *(It would be nice to see a limit-to-number-of-same-errors-logged option added to the LINT .api namespace.)

Unexpected token in attribute selector: '!'.

trigger(ready) called incorrectly                                      jquery.lint.js (line 96)
- More info:                                                           jquery.lint.js (line 111)
   - Collection: [Document carousel.html]
      - Location:                                                      jquery.lint.js (line 111)
             @http://dev.stainsby.ca/widgets/lib/jquery/jquery-1.4.4.js:452 
             @http://dev.stainsby.ca/widgets/lib/jquery/jquery-1.4.4.js:875 
         You passed: ["ready"]
         - Available signatures include:                               jquery.lint.js (line 101)
             trigger(eventType, extraParameters)
             trigger(event)  

(!) jQuery.extend(function () {                                        jquery.lint.js (line 96)
             return runFunction(fn, arguments, _internal, this); 
    }, function () { 
             return runFunction(fn, arguments, _internal, this); 
    }) called incorrectly

- More info:                                                                          jquery.lint.js (line 111)
    - Location:                                                                       jquery.lint.js (line 111)
             (an empty string)
    You passed: [function(), function()]
    - Available signatures include:                                   jquery.lint.js (line 101)
          jQuery.extend(target, [object1], [objectN])
          jQuery.extend([deep], target, object1, [objectN])

(!)  jQuery.extend(function () {                                         jquery.lint.js (line 96)
        return runFunction(fn, arguments, _internal, this); 
      }, function () { 
        return runFunction(fn, arguments, _internal, this); 
      }) called incorrectly

- More info:                                                                         jquery.lint.js (line 111)
    - Location:                                                                      jquery.lint.js (line 111)
             (an empty string)
    You passed: [function(), function()]
    - Available signatures include:                                  jquery.lint.js (line 101)
          jQuery.extend(target, [object1], [objectN])
          jQuery.extend([deep], target, object1, [objectN])

[hpbuniat]

Hi,

the first point is a good hint, but i guess the initial approach was to do a full or nothing check. It might be tricky to check if a call comes from inside jquery. But as jquery internally should also mind it's api .. it's just cycles we're wasting - not food :).

The signature checks are against the published api - which is of course not complete. I've just updated the parser.

Note that the current jq-lint version, shipped with eg. firequery, still has some issues with jquery > 1.4 (including 1.4.4).