You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
@Petah It was closed due no reduced test case per the contributing.md. I'll take a look at #136 but I can't just merge to master something that says "Should fix some issue" without vetting it first. No reduced test case means I have to take more of my time to get that integrated.
Also we can't manually call off because the event function is not exposed to the app scope.
I don't have a single line of code from you explaining what you're trying to do. I can't tell if this is super unique to your implementation or not. I don't know if you've rolled out @JSteunou's fork and if that has worked for you. I literally don't know anything at this point other than a few +1's.
If I could get concrete feedback from anyone on this thread as opposed to pejorative quips, that would be much appreciated and I'll consider reopening.
Activity
davatron5000 commentedon May 22, 2015
Closed due to no reduced test case.
http://api.jquery.com/off/
JSteunou commentedon May 22, 2015
so this plugin does a .on but it's on user to call .off ?
davatron5000 commentedon May 22, 2015
Yeah, if it's something you need to turn off you can totally make that happen.
JSteunou commentedon May 22, 2015
So I would write several
off
in my code, but if someday you change your events or add some, I would rewrite my code.Good practice is to expose a destroy method.
Petah commentedon Sep 2, 2015
+1 on a single page app with many elements being created and destroyed this does leak memory, and reduce performance.
Petah commentedon Sep 2, 2015
Also we can't manually call off because the event function is not exposed to the app scope.
FezVrasta commentedon Jan 5, 2016
+1
JSteunou commentedon Jan 5, 2016
@FezVrasta fork it @davatron5000 is not open to it and not maintaining it anymore...
davatron5000 commentedon Jan 5, 2016
I'm not opposed. Just busy. Will try to look at it today after a few @a11yproject things.
FezVrasta commentedon Jan 5, 2016
@JSteunou I've already did it, unfortunately I need some more advanced feature.
@davatron5000 thanks for the effort
Petah commentedon Jan 5, 2016
Not sure why the issue is closed though, as it clearly is an issue.
davatron5000 commentedon Jan 5, 2016
@Petah It was closed due no reduced test case per the
contributing.md
. I'll take a look at #136 but I can't just merge to master something that says "Should fix some issue" without vetting it first. No reduced test case means I have to take more of my time to get that integrated.I don't have a single line of code from you explaining what you're trying to do. I can't tell if this is super unique to your implementation or not. I don't know if you've rolled out @JSteunou's fork and if that has worked for you. I literally don't know anything at this point other than a few +1's.
If I could get concrete feedback from anyone on this thread as opposed to pejorative quips, that would be much appreciated and I'll consider reopening.
FezVrasta commentedon Jan 5, 2016
Ok, you bind an event with
you instead have to:
and in the
destroy
method:Petah commentedon Jan 5, 2016
I don't think its really possible to create a test case for not being able to unbind an event.