createElement as method of p5.element?

[shiffman]

I'm finding I'm doing this quite a bit in some examples:

var div = createDiv('');
var a = createA('#','somelink');
a.parent(div); 

I wonder if it would make sense to allow:

var div = createDiv('');
var a = div.createA('#', 'somelink');

I am not at all sure about this. . .

[futuremarc]

is there a better way to do this than to create copies of the methods but attach them to the p5.Element then rather than using addElement() to add it to the pInst we'll just use child() instead.

I would use call() but the addElement() method seems to only add elements to pInst

[lmccart]

I wonder if this is just a little too confusing? Right now all the create methods attach something to the DOM, I think it might make sense to stick with this just to make our lives easier on the development side? Or is this creating one element from another pattern something that's really common in JS?

[shiffman]

I'm not too keen on adding complexity so I agree this is probably something to leave out. The use case I am finding is that some of my examples do this alot:

var elt1 = createElement();
var elt2 = createElement();
elt2.parent(elt1);

So is this really any better or less confusing?

var elt1 = createElement();
var elt2 = elt1.createElement();

Now that I write these, I think the answer is likely no. Or certainly not so great that it's worth the code and reference expanding.

[futuremarc]

I think I'd agree when comparing pros and cons; but during testing being able to create an element immediately as a child of another element feels great.

[futuremarc]

Closing this one as it doesn't make too much sense