util/zepto doesn't use $.fn.remove()

[andykant]

Instead it removes some data and uses removeChild(). This creates an issue with Zepto/jQuery plugins that extend $.fn.remove().

[justinbmeyer]

Can you please describe a bit more what you are talking about? Some context and an example would be great.

[justinbmeyer]

Also, jQuery functions on collections are typically referred to as $.fn.XXX and static utilities are $.XXX. Do you mean $.fn.remove?

And what does view/zepto mean? There is no view/zepto module in CanJS. All of our code uses can.remove.

[stevenvachon]

Sure. I often use a plugin called "motion notion" for simple things not involving data/contexts. It extends $.remove and it works fine with can.remove when using CanJS with jQuery. However, when switching over to Zepto, it only works with $.remove because util/zepto simply does a standard removeChild: https://github.com/bitovi/canjs/blob/v2.0.4/util/zepto/zepto.js#L212

Edit:
$.fn.remove is how you define a function, yes, but $.remove is how you call/use it.
Renamed title to correct view/zepto

[justinbmeyer]

@stevenvachon it's a best practice to identify something by where / how it is defined, not by how it's called. Also, one calls $.fn.remove like collection.remove(), not $.remove().

jQuery will refer to $.fn.remove like .remove(), but never $.remove. For example, $.data and .data() are two different things:

$.data - http://api.jquery.com/jquery.data/

.data() http://api.jquery.com/data/

[stevenvachon]

If it were official documentation, I'd have thought it necessary to investigate more accurate labels, but if it's that important for GitHub, ok, I'll keep it in mind. I didn't think $.remove() would be confusing.

[justinbmeyer]

It's important because I want to understand what you are talking about as quickly as possible. I was left wondering if CanJS was overwriting $.fn.remove when it should be overwriting $.remove. For instance there's an important difference between $.data vs $.fn.data, or $.fn.attr vs $.attr.

Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of time to spend thinking about what is "meant". Labels like view/zepto and $.remove are confusing, so I have to follow up with a question and wait for an answer before I can get to fixing stuff. That's time wasted from improving the CanJS. I want to avoid follow up questions if possible.

[stevenvachon]

Cool, I'll aim for that next time then. Original post updated.

[stevenvachon]

Do you like the idea of using util/jquery.js for both jQuery and Zepto? They're pretty interoperable. Could just rename the file to jquery-zepto.js Nevermind, just tried it. Lots of stuff needs to be added for it to simulate jQuery.

[daffl]

Does this mean this is a non-issue?

[stevenvachon]

It's still an issue. I'd just had an idea that didn't work.

[andykant]

Looks like util/zepto overwrites Zepto's methods instead of extend them (specifically $.fn.empty, $.fn.remove, and $.fn.data --- other extended methods still call the originals). $.fn.data should be fine, as no plugins should really be extending it.