It is mentioned in official site of jQuery:

http://api.jquery.com/val/

In the case of select elements, it returns null when no option is selected and an array containing the value of each selected option when there is at least one and it is possible to select more because the multiple attribute is present.

I read that page and completely missed that part. Sorry!

However, it doesn't explain why this is the case? I don't really understand why you would want null rather than an array since you would expect an array for all other cases (when n items are selected and n>0).

I am not sure why exatly but i guess they told to use like this:

$('select').val() || [];

Which is nothing but a short circuit evaluation which is used to set default values!

Means you will not have null in that case!

Fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/jzyyhosx/2/

If it's documented and it's been that way since jQuery 1.2, we'd most likely be breaking a lot of code by changing its behavior. I don't recall why it's done that way but as @NeelBhatt says it's easy to get the result you want.

Ugh. We actually have one test that $( selectMultiple_allSelectedOptionsDisabled ).val() is an empty array, and another (more recent) test that $( selectMultiple_noSelectedOptions ).val() is null. Even though returning null is longstanding, we might want to change it just for consistency.

@gibson042 I agree, this is too inconsistent to keep it like that. I'll reopen so that others can voice their opinions.

We should be careful that changing .val() for this case doesn't change the successful-ness of the control. I agree that we're pretty inconsistent but people may be depending on the current values and behavior. See http://jsbin.com/webugutedi/1/edit?html,js,console

We're all set there because .val() is called inside a .map callback, where returning null has the same effect as returning [] (i.e., no contribution from the context element).

Can not it be done by putting empty string instead of null here:

return val == null ?
                "" :
                jQuery.isArray( val ) ?
                    jQuery.map( val, function( val ) {
                        return { name: elem.name, value: val.replace( rCRLF, "\r\n" ) };
                    }) :
                    { name: elem.name, value: val.replace( rCRLF, "\r\n" ) }; 

So even though people currently using || [] will not get affected by ORing with empty string.

See Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/jzyyhosx/3/

That block of code doesn't even need to change because null and empty-array val yield identical results. But returning empty string there would definitely be incorrect.

This was accepted in today's meeting.

I forgot what we decided. Do we want to change the $( selectMultiple_allSelectedOptionsDisabled ).val() case to return null or the $( selectMultiple_noSelectedOptions ).val() case to return empty array?

Both should return an empty array. The idea is that if we ask for a collection (i.e. "select multiple") then we should get a collection, although it might be empty.

right, thanks.

We are in the process of migrating to jQuery 3 in one of our projects and ran into this today. We couldn't find this as a breaking change in the upgrade guide nor found the documentation to be exact (emphasis mine).

When the first element in the collection is a select-multiple (i.e., a select element with the multiple attribute set), it returns an array containing the value of each selected option, or null if no options are selected.

Did we miss something or is the upgrade guide missing this?

It's mentioned here:
https://jquery.com/upgrade-guide/3.0/#breaking-change-select-multiple-with-nothing-selected-returns-an-empty-array

And seems to be working that way in 3.0:
http://jsbin.com/cuhenofazi/edit?html,js,console,output

There's a docs bug here, it just got missed for the 3.0 api update:
jquery/api.jquery.com#828

Thanks! Seems we missed this, we were looking for .val() and did not find it in the upgrade guide. Thank you for clearing this up. Since this concerns .val(), too, could it be mentioned in the upgrade guide as well?

And is there a way I could help to get this doc update going? :)

Sure, you can file PRs for jquery/api.jquery.com#828 and one for the the upgrade guide at https://github.com/jquery/jquery.com/, that would be greatly appreciated!