Side navigation
#9959 closed bug (invalid)
Opened August 02, 2011 08:04PM UTC
Closed August 02, 2011 09:14PM UTC
Last modified August 02, 2011 11:42PM UTC
$.fn.unbind("eventtype", null) unbinds all handlers with type "eventtype"
| Reported by: | kpozin@gmail.com | Owned by: | kpozin@gmail.com |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | low | Milestone: | None |
| Component: | event | Version: | 1.6.2 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Blocked by: | Blocking: |
Description
jQuery.event.remove currently unbinds all handlers matching the event type and namespace if ( !handler ). This means that if null is accidentally passed in, all matching handlers will be unbound.
There should be a distinction between the handler argument being absent (using arguments.length or typeof handler === "undefined") and the handler argument not being a function. If the argument is absent, the intention is to unbind all matching events. If the handler argument is present but not a function, nothing should be done (as if nothing matched its guid).
Attachments (0)
Change History (6)
Changed August 02, 2011 08:33PM UTC by comment:1
Changed August 02, 2011 08:40PM UTC by comment:2
Why are you calling jQuery.event.remove directly anyway? It is not a public API. And if you passed in null it sounds like you have a code error, like danheberden said.
Changed August 02, 2011 08:41PM UTC by comment:3
| owner: | → kpozin@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| status: | new → pending |
Changed August 02, 2011 08:47PM UTC by comment:4
| status: | pending → new |
|---|
Hmm, maybe the fix should be on unbind rather than on remove. Yes, passing in null is probably a code error. But when null is passed as a handler to .bind(), it's handled gracefully (without throwing an exception). For unbinding, I think handling that case gracefully would mean to not unbind all unrelated handlers.
Changed August 02, 2011 09:14PM UTC by comment:5
| component: | unfiled → event |
|---|---|
| priority: | undecided → low |
| resolution: | → invalid |
| status: | new → closed |
I'm not sure why we're even debating this. Passing null as a second arg to unbind is incorrect. The second arg has accepted params: handler or false;
Changed August 02, 2011 11:42PM UTC by comment:6
Given the reply, I agree this is invalid.
But when null is passed as a handler to .bind(), it's handled gracefully (without throwing an exception).
That is not documented behavior, I wouldn't depend on it to work that way forever.
I'm confused at the use-case for this. Why would anyone "accidentally" pass in null? If nothing is to be unbound, the function should not be called, ya? Plus if i'm after a boolean option to unbind, i'd rather is be falsy instead of someVar ? undefined : null;