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/