Skip to main content

Bug Tracker

Side navigation

#7877 closed bug (wontfix)

Opened December 31, 2010 12:39AM UTC

Closed April 17, 2011 09:17PM UTC

Last modified March 14, 2012 12:36AM UTC

getData/setData/changeData events need tech review and docs

Reported by: dmethvin Owned by:
Priority: high Milestone: 1.6
Component: web Version: git
Keywords: Cc:
Blocked by: Blocking:
Attachments (0)
Change History (7)

Changed December 31, 2010 12:42AM UTC by dmethvin comment:1

component: unfileddata
milestone: 1.next1.5
priority: undecidedhigh
version: 1.4.4git

Changed December 31, 2010 10:57PM UTC by snover comment:2

#7573 is a duplicate of this ticket.

Changed January 25, 2011 12:49AM UTC by snover comment:3

status: newopen

I think they should be removed. They are slow, inconsistent to other events, and could be duck punched in by anyone that needs them.

Changed January 27, 2011 02:20PM UTC by jitter comment:4

milestone: 1.51.6

I'm not totally against removing them. We should bring this on for the 1.6 roadmap, maybe deprecate for 1.6/1.7 and then sometime remove'em + compat plugin.

In the meantime I propose something like this to speed up $ This way $ would only be 2x-3x slower then $.data if no one listens to the data-events.

Changed April 17, 2011 09:17PM UTC by john comment:5

component: dataweb
keywords: → needsdocs
resolution: → wontfix
status: openclosed

Since we've decided to keep the events, I'm closing this and adding the needsdocs keyword so that we can tackle that later.

Changed July 14, 2011 01:49PM UTC by addyosmani comment:6

keywords: needsdocs

Having spoken to Dave and Karl regarding this, there appear to be some oppositions to us documenting these methods at the moment. I'll be removing the needsdocs tag until a point where we decide to document them again.

Changed July 22, 2011 07:46AM UTC by comment:7

To anyone who might be concerned with my opinion:

In the release notes for 1.4.3 you noted changes to two of these functions, and introduced the third. I am positive that these are useful functions, but the utter lack of documentation limits their adoption, and honestly, ambiguates "your" official position on whether or not anyone should use them. In our communities, as you well know, when a feature is undocumented, we tend to avoid it, even when it proves to be incredibly useful, because we don't want to introduce regressions later when the feature unexpectedly disappears...

From one programmer to another, please either document these features, or remove them, so it's not ambiguous to all of us out here whether or not they will be dependable. I'd much rather just write a plugin to do this same thing, but don't want to duplicate your work if it's sticking around...

Thanks :)

(you're doing a great job)