Suggested selector/function .or()

[addyosmani]

From: ​http://forum.jquery.com/topic/traversing-or#14737000001495015 A suggestion for including support for or()

.or( [selector/function] ) The method allows comfortable handling of situations where a selector is not matched.

Suggested code:

    $.fn.or=function(a){var t=this;return t.length>0?t:(t=t.end())&&$.isFunction(a)?a.apply(t):a?t.find(a):t}

Additional use and test cases can be found here: ​http://www.jsfiddle.net/naugtur/rdEAu/

[snover]

Smells like bikeshed/feature creep to me, so placing in review.

[naugtur]

I have fixed the misbehaviour stated in examples. I will update the jsFiddle page soon.

The fix is about .or() being able to use the most recent traversing method so that it's more intuitive (and makes sense when a chain with .or is read aloud)

[snover]

Resetting milestone to future.

[dmethvin]

A couple of times long ago I used $("#id1").add("#id2").eq(0) to get #id2 if #id1 doesn't exist, but that depended on .add appending the element to the set and I'm not sure it's good to depend on that (it may use document order).

[john]

This proposal has been coming up since the beginning of jQuery. Let's stick this in the roadmap review for 1.7 and figure it out once and for all.

[john]

Nominating ticket for 1.7 discussion.

[Rick Waldron]

+1, I'm beginning to like the idea; dislike the implementation

[Rick Waldron]

Simpler implementation + unit tests: ​http://jsfiddle.net/rwaldron/LNC5m/

[jaubourg]

-1, we don't need other helpers in core. Let's make an official plugin for all these.

[timmywil]

-1, sounds like a feature creep

[ajpiano]

+0, Are there really a lot of situations where people should be writing code that just is appropriate for different elements depending on which is there? It's not a tonne of code, and seems people want it, but also a bit confusing. I'm on the fence.

[john]

+0, Ehhh... I'm really hesitant to just add this straight in. A lot more thought should go into it (building off of whatever expression happened last, for example).

[addyosmani]

I'm going to +0/-1 this one too. On reflection it's not something I still feel should belong in core in it's current state.

[scottgonzalez]

-1, This is one of the most difficult to immediately understand APIs. I would expect a ton of confusion by users about $( ".a" ).or( ".b" ) vs. $( ".a" ).add( ".b" ) vs. $( ".a, .b" ). I've definitely had use cases for this, but this is far from a pain point and not too common.

[jzaefferer]

-1

[danheberden]

-1, plugin

[Rick Waldron]

Needs to prove itself as a widely adopted plugin

[Rick Waldron]

#9638 is a duplicate of this ticket.