Search Results

Search found 29575 results on 1183 pages for 'dynamic javascript'.

Page 2/1183 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is there a javascript library that contains a rich set of very high level commonly used functions?

    - by bobo
    I find that many high level functions are missing in most well-known javascript libraries such as jquery, YUI...etc. Taking string manipulation as an example, startsWith, endsWith, contains, lTrim, rTrim, trim, isNullOrEmpty...etc. These function are actually very common ones. I would like to know if there exists a javascript library/ plugin of a javascript library that fills these gaps (including but not limited to string manipulation)? It would be great if the library does not override the prototype.

    Read the article

  • How do I convert some ugly inline javascript into a function?

    - by Taylor
    I've got a form with various inputs that by default have no value. When a user changes one or more of the inputs all values including the blank ones are used in the URL GET string when submitted. So to clean it up I've got some javascript that removes the inputs before submission. It works well enough but I was wondering how to put this in a js function or tidy it up. Seems a bit messy to have it all clumped in to an onclick. Plus i'm going to be adding more so there will be quite a few. Here's the relevant code. There are 3 seperate lines for 3 seperate inputs. The first part of the line has a value that refers to the inputs ID ("mf","cf","bf","pf") and the second part of the line refers to the parent div ("dmf","dcf", etc). The first part is an example of the input structure... echo "<div id='dmf'><select id='mf' name='mFilter'>"; This part is the submit and js... echo "<input type='submit' value='Apply' onclick='javascript: if (document.getElementById(\"mf\").value==\"\") { document.getElementById(\"dmf\").innerHTML=\"\"; } if (document.getElementById(\"cf\").value==\"\") { document.getElementById(\"dcf\").innerHTML=\"\"; } if (document.getElementById(\"bf\").value==\"\") { document.getElementById(\"dbf\").innerHTML=\"\"; } if (document.getElementById(\"pf\").value==\"\") { document.getElementById(\"dpf\").innerHTML=\"\"; } ' />"; I have pretty much zero javascript knowledge so help turning this in to a neater function or similar would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Pluralsight Meet the Author Podcast on Structuring JavaScript Code

    - by dwahlin
    I had the opportunity to talk with Fritz Onion from Pluralsight about one of my recent courses titled Structuring JavaScript Code for one of their Meet the Author podcasts. We talked about why JavaScript patterns are important for building more re-useable and maintainable apps, pros and cons of different patterns, and how to go about picking a pattern as a project is started. The course provides a solid walk-through of converting what I call “Function Spaghetti Code” into more modular code that’s easier to maintain, more re-useable, and less susceptible to naming conflicts. Patterns covered in the course include the Prototype Pattern, Revealing Module Pattern, and Revealing Prototype Pattern along with several other tips and techniques that can be used. Meet the Author:  Dan Wahlin on Structuring JavaScript Code   The transcript from the podcast is shown below: [Fritz]  Hello, this is Fritz Onion with another Pluralsight author interview. Today we’re talking with Dan Wahlin about his new course, Structuring JavaScript Code. Hi, Dan, it’s good to have you with us today. [Dan]  Thanks for having me, Fritz. [Fritz]  So, Dan, your new course, which came out in December of 2011 called Structuring JavaScript Code, goes into several patterns of usage in JavaScript as well as ways of organizing your code and what struck me about it was all the different techniques you described for encapsulating your code. I was wondering if you could give us just a little insight into what your motivation was for creating this course and sort of why you decided to write it and record it. [Dan]  Sure. So, I got started with JavaScript back in the mid 90s. In fact, back in the days when browsers that most people haven’t heard of were out and we had JavaScript but it wasn’t great. I was on a project in the late 90s that was heavy, heavy JavaScript and we pretty much did what I call in the course function spaghetti code where you just have function after function, there’s no rhyme or reason to how those functions are structured, they just kind of flow and it’s a little bit hard to do maintenance on it, you really don’t get a lot of reuse as far as from an object perspective. And so coming from an object-oriented background in JAVA and C#, I wanted to put something together that highlighted kind of the new way if you will of writing JavaScript because most people start out just writing functions and there’s nothing with that, it works, but it’s definitely not a real reusable solution. So the course is really all about how to move from just kind of function after function after function to the world of more encapsulated code and more reusable and hopefully better maintenance in the process. [Fritz]  So I am sure a lot of people have had similar experiences with their JavaScript code and will be looking forward to seeing what types of patterns you’ve put forth. Now, a couple I noticed in your course one is you start off with the prototype pattern. Do you want to describe sort of what problem that solves and how you go about using it within JavaScript? [Dan]  Sure. So, the patterns that are covered such as the prototype pattern and the revealing module pattern just as two examples, you know, show these kind of three things that I harp on throughout the course of encapsulation, better maintenance, reuse, those types of things. The prototype pattern specifically though has a couple kind of pros over some of the other patterns and that is the ability to extend your code without touching source code and what I mean by that is let’s say you’re writing a library that you know either other teammates or other people just out there on the Internet in general are going to be using. With the prototype pattern, you can actually write your code in such a way that we’re leveraging the JavaScript property and by doing that now you can extend my code that I wrote without touching my source code script or you can even override my code and perform some new functionality. Again, without touching my code.  And so you get kind of the benefit of the almost like inheritance or overriding in object oriented languages with this prototype pattern and it makes it kind of attractive that way definitely from a maintenance standpoint because, you know, you don’t want to modify a script I wrote because I might roll out version 2 and now you’d have to track where you change things and it gets a little tricky. So with this you just override those pieces or extend them and get that functionality and that’s kind of some of the benefits that that pattern offers out of the box. [Fritz]  And then the revealing module pattern, how does that differ from the prototype pattern and what problem does that solve differently? [Dan]  Yeah, so the prototype pattern and there’s another one that’s kind of really closely lined with revealing module pattern called the revealing prototype pattern and it also uses the prototype key word but it’s very similar to the one you just asked about the revealing module pattern. [Fritz]  Okay. [Dan]  This is a really popular one out there. In fact, we did a project for Microsoft that was very, very heavy JavaScript. It was an HMTL5 jQuery type app and we use this pattern for most of the structure if you will for the JavaScript code and what it does in a nutshell is allows you to get that encapsulation so you have really a single function wrapper that wraps all your other child functions but it gives you the ability to do public versus private members and this is kind of a sort of debate out there on the web. Some people feel that all JavaScript code should just be directly accessible and others kind of like to be able to hide their, truly their private stuff and a lot of people do that. You just put an underscore in front of your field or your variable name or your function name and that kind of is the defacto way to say hey, this is private. With the revealing module pattern you can do the equivalent of what objective oriented languages do and actually have private members that you literally can’t get to as an external consumer of the JavaScript code and then you can expose only those members that you want to be public. Now, you don’t get the benefit though of the prototype feature, which is I can’t easily extend the revealing module pattern type code if you don’t like something I’m doing, chances are you’re probably going to have to tweak my code to fix that because we’re not leveraging prototyping but in situations where you’re writing apps that are very specific to a given target app, you know, it’s not a library, it’s not going to be used in other apps all over the place, it’s a pattern I actually like a lot, it’s very simple to get going and then if you do like that public/private feature, it’s available to you. [Fritz]  Yeah, that’s interesting. So it’s almost, you can either go private by convention just by using a standard naming convention or you can actually enforce it by using the prototype pattern. [Dan]  Yeah, that’s exactly right. [Fritz]  So one of the things that I know I run across in JavaScript and I’m curious to get your take on is we do have all these different techniques of encapsulation and each one is really quite different when you’re using closures versus simply, you know, referencing member variables and adding them to your objects that the syntax changes with each pattern and the usage changes. So what would you recommend for people starting out in a brand new JavaScript project? Should they all sort of decide beforehand on what patterns they’re going to stick to or do you change it based on what part of the library you’re working on? I know that’s one of the points of confusion in this space. [Dan]  Yeah, it’s a great question. In fact, I just had a company ask me about that. So which one do I pick and, of course, there’s not one answer fits all. [Fritz]  Right. [Dan]  So it really depends what you just said is absolutely in my opinion correct, which is I think as a, especially if you’re on a team or even if you’re just an individual a team of one, you should go through and pick out which pattern for this particular project you think is best. Now if it were me, here’s kind of the way I think of it. If I were writing a let’s say base library that several web apps are going to use or even one, but I know that there’s going to be some pieces that I’m not really sure on right now as I’m writing I and I know people might want to hook in that and have some better extension points, then I would look at either the prototype pattern or the revealing prototype. Now, really just a real quick summation between the two the revealing prototype also gives you that public/private stuff like the revealing module pattern does whereas the prototype pattern does not but both of the prototype patterns do give you the benefit of that extension or that hook capability. So, if I were writing a library that I need people to override things or I’m not even sure what I need them to override, I want them to have that option, I’d probably pick a prototype, one of the prototype patterns. If I’m writing some code that is very unique to the app and it’s kind of a one off for this app which is what I think a lot of people are kind of in that mode as writing custom apps for customers, then my personal preference is the revealing module pattern you could always go with the module pattern as well which is very close but I think the revealing module patterns a little bit cleaner and we go through that in the course and explain kind of the syntax there and the differences. [Fritz]  Great, that makes a lot of sense. [Fritz]  I appreciate you taking the time, Dan, and I hope everyone takes a chance to look at your course and sort of make these decisions for themselves in their next JavaScript project. Dan’s course is, Structuring JavaScript Code and it’s available now in the Pluralsight Library. So, thank you very much, Dan. [Dan]  Thanks for having me again.

    Read the article

  • Free Dynamic DNS Nameservers

    - by Maxim Zaslavsky
    I recently set up a home server that I want to use as my primary hosting platform. So far, I've mapped some domains to it by setting up A records for them that point to my home IP. As my home IP can change randomly and without notice, however, I'm afraid of such downtime. Thus, I'm looking for a dynamic DNS solution. So far, I've set up DynDNS, but I haven't found a way to use dynamic DNS with an existing domain. Are there any free dynamic DNS nameserver services available?

    Read the article

  • Using JSON.NET for dynamic JSON parsing

    - by Rick Strahl
    With the release of ASP.NET Web API as part of .NET 4.5 and MVC 4.0, JSON.NET has effectively pushed out the .NET native serializers to become the default serializer for Web API. JSON.NET is vastly more flexible than the built in DataContractJsonSerializer or the older JavaScript serializer. The DataContractSerializer in particular has been very problematic in the past because it can't deal with untyped objects for serialization - like values of type object, or anonymous types which are quite common these days. The JavaScript Serializer that came before it actually does support non-typed objects for serialization but it can't do anything with untyped data coming in from JavaScript and it's overall model of extensibility was pretty limited (JavaScript Serializer is what MVC uses for JSON responses). JSON.NET provides a robust JSON serializer that has both high level and low level components, supports binary JSON, JSON contracts, Xml to JSON conversion, LINQ to JSON and many, many more features than either of the built in serializers. ASP.NET Web API now uses JSON.NET as its default serializer and is now pulled in as a NuGet dependency into Web API projects, which is great. Dynamic JSON Parsing One of the features that I think is getting ever more important is the ability to serialize and deserialize arbitrary JSON content dynamically - that is without mapping the JSON captured directly into a .NET type as DataContractSerializer or the JavaScript Serializers do. Sometimes it isn't possible to map types due to the differences in languages (think collections, dictionaries etc), and other times you simply don't have the structures in place or don't want to create them to actually import the data. If this topic sounds familiar - you're right! I wrote about dynamic JSON parsing a few months back before JSON.NET was added to Web API and when Web API and the System.Net HttpClient libraries included the System.Json classes like JsonObject and JsonArray. With the inclusion of JSON.NET in Web API these classes are now obsolete and didn't ship with Web API or the client libraries. I re-linked my original post to this one. In this post I'll discus JToken, JObject and JArray which are the dynamic JSON objects that make it very easy to create and retrieve JSON content on the fly without underlying types. Why Dynamic JSON? So, why Dynamic JSON parsing rather than strongly typed parsing? Since applications are interacting more and more with third party services it becomes ever more important to have easy access to those services with easy JSON parsing. Sometimes it just makes lot of sense to pull just a small amount of data out of large JSON document received from a service, because the third party service isn't directly related to your application's logic most of the time - and it makes little sense to map the entire service structure in your application. For example, recently I worked with the Google Maps Places API to return information about businesses close to me (or rather the app's) location. The Google API returns a ton of information that my application had no interest in - all I needed was few values out of the data. Dynamic JSON parsing makes it possible to map this data, without having to map the entire API to a C# data structure. Instead I could pull out the three or four values I needed from the API and directly store it on my business entities that needed to receive the data - no need to map the entire Maps API structure. Getting JSON.NET The easiest way to use JSON.NET is to grab it via NuGet and add it as a reference to your project. You can add it to your project with: PM> Install-Package Newtonsoft.Json From the Package Manager Console or by using Manage NuGet Packages in your project References. As mentioned if you're using ASP.NET Web API or MVC 4 JSON.NET will be automatically added to your project. Alternately you can also go to the CodePlex site and download the latest version including source code: http://json.codeplex.com/ Creating JSON on the fly with JObject and JArray Let's start with creating some JSON on the fly. It's super easy to create a dynamic object structure with any of the JToken derived JSON.NET objects. The most common JToken derived classes you are likely to use are JObject and JArray. JToken implements IDynamicMetaProvider and so uses the dynamic  keyword extensively to make it intuitive to create object structures and turn them into JSON via dynamic object syntax. Here's an example of creating a music album structure with child songs using JObject for the base object and songs and JArray for the actual collection of songs:[TestMethod] public void JObjectOutputTest() { // strong typed instance var jsonObject = new JObject(); // you can explicitly add values here using class interface jsonObject.Add("Entered", DateTime.Now); // or cast to dynamic to dynamically add/read properties dynamic album = jsonObject; album.AlbumName = "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"; album.Artist = "AC/DC"; album.YearReleased = 1976; album.Songs = new JArray() as dynamic; dynamic song = new JObject(); song.SongName = "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"; song.SongLength = "4:11"; album.Songs.Add(song); song = new JObject(); song.SongName = "Love at First Feel"; song.SongLength = "3:10"; album.Songs.Add(song); Console.WriteLine(album.ToString()); } This produces a complete JSON structure: { "Entered": "2012-08-18T13:26:37.7137482-10:00", "AlbumName": "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap", "Artist": "AC/DC", "YearReleased": 1976, "Songs": [ { "SongName": "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap", "SongLength": "4:11" }, { "SongName": "Love at First Feel", "SongLength": "3:10" } ] } Notice that JSON.NET does a nice job formatting the JSON, so it's easy to read and paste into blog posts :-). JSON.NET includes a bunch of configuration options that control how JSON is generated. Typically the defaults are just fine, but you can override with the JsonSettings object for most operations. The important thing about this code is that there's no explicit type used for holding the values to serialize to JSON. Rather the JSON.NET objects are the containers that receive the data as I build up my JSON structure dynamically, simply by adding properties. This means this code can be entirely driven at runtime without compile time restraints of structure for the JSON output. Here I use JObject to create a album 'object' and immediately cast it to dynamic. JObject() is kind of similar in behavior to ExpandoObject in that it allows you to add properties by simply assigning to them. Internally, JObject values are stored in pseudo collections of key value pairs that are exposed as properties through the IDynamicMetaObject interface exposed in JSON.NET's JToken base class. For objects the syntax is very clean - you add simple typed values as properties. For objects and arrays you have to explicitly create new JObject or JArray, cast them to dynamic and then add properties and items to them. Always remember though these values are dynamic - which means no Intellisense and no compiler type checking. It's up to you to ensure that the names and values you create are accessed consistently and without typos in your code. Note that you can also access the JObject instance directly (not as dynamic) and get access to the underlying JObject type. This means you can assign properties by string, which can be useful for fully data driven JSON generation from other structures. Below you can see both styles of access next to each other:// strong type instance var jsonObject = new JObject(); // you can explicitly add values here jsonObject.Add("Entered", DateTime.Now); // expando style instance you can just 'use' properties dynamic album = jsonObject; album.AlbumName = "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"; JContainer (the base class for JObject and JArray) is a collection so you can also iterate over the properties at runtime easily:foreach (var item in jsonObject) { Console.WriteLine(item.Key + " " + item.Value.ToString()); } The functionality of the JSON objects are very similar to .NET's ExpandObject and if you used it before, you're already familiar with how the dynamic interfaces to the JSON objects works. Importing JSON with JObject.Parse() and JArray.Parse() The JValue structure supports importing JSON via the Parse() and Load() methods which can read JSON data from a string or various streams respectively. Essentially JValue includes the core JSON parsing to turn a JSON string into a collection of JsonValue objects that can be then referenced using familiar dynamic object syntax. Here's a simple example:public void JValueParsingTest() { var jsonString = @"{""Name"":""Rick"",""Company"":""West Wind"", ""Entered"":""2012-03-16T00:03:33.245-10:00""}"; dynamic json = JValue.Parse(jsonString); // values require casting string name = json.Name; string company = json.Company; DateTime entered = json.Entered; Assert.AreEqual(name, "Rick"); Assert.AreEqual(company, "West Wind"); } The JSON string represents an object with three properties which is parsed into a JObject class and cast to dynamic. Once cast to dynamic I can then go ahead and access the object using familiar object syntax. Note that the actual values - json.Name, json.Company, json.Entered - are actually of type JToken and I have to cast them to their appropriate types first before I can do type comparisons as in the Asserts at the end of the test method. This is required because of the way that dynamic types work which can't determine the type based on the method signature of the Assert.AreEqual(object,object) method. I have to either assign the dynamic value to a variable as I did above, or explicitly cast ( (string) json.Name) in the actual method call. The JSON structure can be much more complex than this simple example. Here's another example of an array of albums serialized to JSON and then parsed through with JsonValue():[TestMethod] public void JsonArrayParsingTest() { var jsonString = @"[ { ""Id"": ""b3ec4e5c"", ""AlbumName"": ""Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"", ""Artist"": ""AC/DC"", ""YearReleased"": 1976, ""Entered"": ""2012-03-16T00:13:12.2810521-10:00"", ""AlbumImageUrl"": ""http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61kTaH-uZBL._AA115_.jpg"", ""AmazonUrl"": ""http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/…ASIN=B00008BXJ4"", ""Songs"": [ { ""AlbumId"": ""b3ec4e5c"", ""SongName"": ""Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"", ""SongLength"": ""4:11"" }, { ""AlbumId"": ""b3ec4e5c"", ""SongName"": ""Love at First Feel"", ""SongLength"": ""3:10"" }, { ""AlbumId"": ""b3ec4e5c"", ""SongName"": ""Big Balls"", ""SongLength"": ""2:38"" } ] }, { ""Id"": ""7b919432"", ""AlbumName"": ""End of the Silence"", ""Artist"": ""Henry Rollins Band"", ""YearReleased"": 1992, ""Entered"": ""2012-03-16T00:13:12.2800521-10:00"", ""AlbumImageUrl"": ""http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51FO3rb1tuL._SL160_AA160_.jpg"", ""AmazonUrl"": ""http://www.amazon.com/End-Silence-Rollins-Band/dp/B0000040OX/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1302232195&sr=8-5"", ""Songs"": [ { ""AlbumId"": ""7b919432"", ""SongName"": ""Low Self Opinion"", ""SongLength"": ""5:24"" }, { ""AlbumId"": ""7b919432"", ""SongName"": ""Grip"", ""SongLength"": ""4:51"" } ] } ]"; JArray jsonVal = JArray.Parse(jsonString) as JArray; dynamic albums = jsonVal; foreach (dynamic album in albums) { Console.WriteLine(album.AlbumName + " (" + album.YearReleased.ToString() + ")"); foreach (dynamic song in album.Songs) { Console.WriteLine("\t" + song.SongName); } } Console.WriteLine(albums[0].AlbumName); Console.WriteLine(albums[0].Songs[1].SongName); } JObject and JArray in ASP.NET Web API Of course these types also work in ASP.NET Web API controller methods. If you want you can accept parameters using these object or return them back to the server. The following contrived example receives dynamic JSON input, and then creates a new dynamic JSON object and returns it based on data from the first:[HttpPost] public JObject PostAlbumJObject(JObject jAlbum) { // dynamic input from inbound JSON dynamic album = jAlbum; // create a new JSON object to write out dynamic newAlbum = new JObject(); // Create properties on the new instance // with values from the first newAlbum.AlbumName = album.AlbumName + " New"; newAlbum.NewProperty = "something new"; newAlbum.Songs = new JArray(); foreach (dynamic song in album.Songs) { song.SongName = song.SongName + " New"; newAlbum.Songs.Add(song); } return newAlbum; } The raw POST request to the server looks something like this: POST http://localhost/aspnetwebapi/samples/PostAlbumJObject HTTP/1.1User-Agent: FiddlerContent-type: application/jsonHost: localhostContent-Length: 88 {AlbumName: "Dirty Deeds",Songs:[ { SongName: "Problem Child"},{ SongName: "Squealer"}]} and the output that comes back looks like this: {  "AlbumName": "Dirty Deeds New",  "NewProperty": "something new",  "Songs": [    {      "SongName": "Problem Child New"    },    {      "SongName": "Squealer New"    }  ]} The original values are echoed back with something extra appended to demonstrate that we're working with a new object. When you receive or return a JObject, JValue, JToken or JArray instance in a Web API method, Web API ignores normal content negotiation and assumes your content is going to be received and returned as JSON, so effectively the parameter and result type explicitly determines the input and output format which is nice. Dynamic to Strong Type Mapping You can also map JObject and JArray instances to a strongly typed object, so you can mix dynamic and static typing in the same piece of code. Using the 2 Album jsonString shown earlier, the code below takes an array of albums and picks out only a single album and casts that album to a static Album instance.[TestMethod] public void JsonParseToStrongTypeTest() { JArray albums = JArray.Parse(jsonString) as JArray; // pick out one album JObject jalbum = albums[0] as JObject; // Copy to a static Album instance Album album = jalbum.ToObject<Album>(); Assert.IsNotNull(album); Assert.AreEqual(album.AlbumName,jalbum.Value<string>("AlbumName")); Assert.IsTrue(album.Songs.Count > 0); } This is pretty damn useful for the scenario I mentioned earlier - you can read a large chunk of JSON and dynamically walk the property hierarchy down to the item you want to access, and then either access the specific item dynamically (as shown earlier) or map a part of the JSON to a strongly typed object. That's very powerful if you think about it - it leaves you in total control to decide what's dynamic and what's static. Strongly typed JSON Parsing With all this talk of dynamic let's not forget that JSON.NET of course also does strongly typed serialization which is drop dead easy. Here's a simple example on how to serialize and deserialize an object with JSON.NET:[TestMethod] public void StronglyTypedSerializationTest() { // Demonstrate deserialization from a raw string var album = new Album() { AlbumName = "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap", Artist = "AC/DC", Entered = DateTime.Now, YearReleased = 1976, Songs = new List<Song>() { new Song() { SongName = "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap", SongLength = "4:11" }, new Song() { SongName = "Love at First Feel", SongLength = "3:10" } } }; // serialize to string string json2 = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(album,Formatting.Indented); Console.WriteLine(json2); // make sure we can serialize back var album2 = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<Album>(json2); Assert.IsNotNull(album2); Assert.IsTrue(album2.AlbumName == "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"); Assert.IsTrue(album2.Songs.Count == 2); } JsonConvert is a high level static class that wraps lower level functionality, but you can also use the JsonSerializer class, which allows you to serialize/parse to and from streams. It's a little more work, but gives you a bit more control. The functionality available is easy to discover with Intellisense, and that's good because there's not a lot in the way of documentation that's actually useful. Summary JSON.NET is a pretty complete JSON implementation with lots of different choices for JSON parsing from dynamic parsing to static serialization, to complex querying of JSON objects using LINQ. It's good to see this open source library getting integrated into .NET, and pushing out the old and tired stock .NET parsers so that we finally have a bit more flexibility - and extensibility - in our JSON parsing. Good to go! Resources Sample Test Project http://json.codeplex.com/© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in .NET  Web Api  AJAX   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • How can I create a dynamic site that is still search-bot friendly?

    - by zuko
    If I want to have a slide effect between pages. You click a link, it is loaded off to the side and then slides in (pushing the old page off the other side). I can imagine using jQuery to do the PHP and the effects... but how do I do something like this that gracefully degrades for users without Javascript, including bots? Possibly more problematic: what if I wanted to have a sort of mural background across the site, perhaps with a parallax scrolling effect, and sliding to other pages reveals more of the, possibly giant image? Again, I can imagine how to do this with lots of fancy jQuery and PHP but it would heavily rely on those. How can I gracefully degrade in a situation like that? Any pointers, articles or books would be greatly appreciated. I keep trying to search for answers but I just get a lot of "theory"-based, unhelpful blogs.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET JavaScript Routing for ASP.NET MVC–Constraints

    - by zowens
    If you haven’t had a look at my previous post about ASP.NET routing, go ahead and check it out before you read this post: http://weblogs.asp.net/zowens/archive/2010/12/20/asp-net-mvc-javascript-routing.aspx And the code is here: https://github.com/zowens/ASP.NET-MVC-JavaScript-Routing   Anyways, this post is about routing constraints. A routing constraint is essentially a way for the routing engine to filter out route patterns based on the day from the URL. For example, if I have a route where all the parameters are required, I could use a constraint on the required parameters to say that the parameter is non-empty. Here’s what the constraint would look like: Notice that this is a class that inherits from IRouteConstraint, which is an interface provided by System.Web.Routing. The match method returns true if the value is a match (and can be further processed by the routing rules) or false if it does not match (and the route will be matched further along the route collection). Because routing constraints are so essential to the route matching process, it was important that they be part of my JavaScript routing engine. But the problem is that we need to somehow represent the constraint in JavaScript. I made a design decision early on that you MUST put this constraint into JavaScript to match a route. I didn’t want to have server interaction for the URL generation, like I’ve seen in so many applications. While this is easy to maintain, it causes maintenance issues in my opinion. So the way constraints work in JavaScript is that the constraint as an object type definition is set on the route manager. When a route is created, a new instance of the constraint is created with the specific parameter. In its current form the constraint function MUST return a function that takes the route data and will return true or false. You will see the NotEmpty constraint in a bit. Another piece to the puzzle is that you can have the JavaScript exist as a string in your application that is pulled in when the routing JavaScript code is generated. There is a simple interface, IJavaScriptAddition, that I have added that will be used to output custom JavaScript. Let’s put it all together. Here is the NotEmpty constraint. There’s a few things at work here. The constraint is called “notEmpty” in JavaScript. When you add the constraint to a parameter in your C# code, the route manager generator will look for the JsConstraint attribute to look for the name of the constraint type name and fallback to the class name. For example, if I didn’t apply the “JsConstraint” attribute, the constraint would be called “NotEmpty”. The JavaScript code essentially adds a function to the “constraintTypeDefs” object on the “notEmpty” property (this is how constraints are added to routes). The function returns another function that will be invoked with routing data. Here’s how you would use the NotEmpty constraint in C# and it will work with the JavaScript routing generator. The only catch to using route constraints currently is that the following is not supported: The constraint will work in C# but is not supported by my JavaScript routing engine. (I take pull requests so if you’d like this… go ahead and implement it).   I just wanted to take this post to explain a little bit about the background on constraints. I am looking at expanding the current functionality, but for now this is a good start. Thanks for all the support with the JavaScript router. Keep the feedback coming!

    Read the article

  • Repeated calls with random Javascript append to the URL

    - by cjk
    I keep getting calls to my server where there is random Javascript appended on the end of lots of the calls, e.g.: /UI/Includes/JavaScript/).length)&&e.error( /UI/Includes/JavaScript/,C,!1),a.addEventListener( /UI/Includes/JavaScript/),l=b.createDocumentFragment(),m=b.documentElement,n=m.firstChild,o=b.createElement( /UI/Includes/JavaScript/&&a.getAttributeNode( /UI/Includes/JavaScript/&&a.firstChild.getAttribute( /UI/Includes/JavaScript/).replace(bd, /UI/Includes/JavaScript/)),a.getElementsByTagName( The user agent is always this: Mozilla/4.0+(compatible;+MSIE+6.0;+Windows+NT+5.1;+SV1;+.NET+CLR+2.0.50727) I have jQuery, Modernizr and other JS and originally thought that some browser was messing up it's JS calls, however this particular IP address hasn't requested any images so I'm wondering if it is some kind of attack. Is this a common occurence?

    Read the article

  • What should be tested in Javascript?

    - by Nathan Hoad
    At work, we've just started on a heavily Javascript based application (actually using Coffeescript, but still), of which I've been implementing an automated test system using JsTestDriver and fabric. We've never written something with this much Javascript, so up until now we've never done any Javascript testing. I'm unsure what exactly we should be testing in our unit tests. We've written JQuery plugins for various things, so it's quite obvious that they should be verified for correctness as much as possible with JsTestDriver, but everyone else in my team seems to think that we should be testing the page level Javascript as well. I don't think we should be testing page level Javascript as unit tests, but instead using a system like Selenium to verify everything works as expected. My main reasoning for this is that at the moment, page level Javascript tests are guaranteed to fail through JsTestDriver, because they're trying to access elements on the DOM that can't possibly exist. So, what should be unit tested in Javascript?

    Read the article

  • Why not use JavaScript but libraries instead?

    - by shareef
    I read this article Unobtrusive JavaScript with jQuery and I noticed these points in the slide page 11 some companies strip JavaScript at the firewall some run the NoScript Firefox extension to protect themselves from common XSS and CSRF attacks many mobile devices ignore JavaScript entirely screen readers do execute JavaScript but accessibility issues mean you may not want them to I did not understand the fourth point. What does it mean? I need your comment and responses on these points. Is not using JavaScript and switching to libraries like jQuery worth it?

    Read the article

  • What is JavaScript, really?

    - by Lord Loh.
    All this started when I was looking for a way to test my webpage for JavaScript conformance like the W3C HTML Validator. I have not found one yet. So let me know if you know of any... I looked for the official JavaScript page and find ECMA Script. These people have standardized a scripting language (I do not feel like calling it JavaScript anymore!) and called it ECMA-262 (Wikipedia). Their latest work is Edition 5.1 JavaScript was developed my Mozilla Corporation and their last stable version is 1.8.5 (see this) which is based on the ECMA's edition 5.1 The Wikipedia page linked mentions dialects. Mozilla's JavaScript 1.8.5 is listed as a dialect along with JScript 9 (IE) and JavaScript (Chrome's V8[Wiki]) and a lot others. Am I to understand that JavaScript 1.8.5 is a derivative of the ECMA-262 and SpiderMonkey[Wiki] is an engine that runs it? And Chrome has its own dialect and V8 engine is the program that runs it? With all these dialects based off ECMA-262, what I can no longer understand is "What is JavaScript"? Are there any truly cross browser scripting languages? Do the various implementers come together to agree on the dialect cross compatibility? Is this effort ECMA?

    Read the article

  • Web server behind MikroTik and dynamic dns

    - by danielrvt
    I recently purchased a MikroTik router, it works great! However, I haven't been able to make my web server work from outside my lan I'll explain better: I have two domains in my disposal, before I switched to Mikrotik, the were working perfectly and all my websites were online. Since I changed the router, every time I try to access my websites from outside my lan, my websites can't be found. I have my websites domains associated with a dynamic dns provider, I managed to create a port forwarding rule to redirect all my incoming traffic from port 80 to my web server, and it works, but only when I'm connected to my MikroTik router. Is there something else I have to do? PD: I also created a static dns rule in my router with my domains to associate it to my webserver (which is behind my router) PD2: All I want is to redirect requests from outside to my webserver...

    Read the article

  • How do I serve dynamic WebDAV directory listings using Apache

    - by Jack Douglas
    I can use mod_rewrite to redirect /dynamic.php/xyz.php to /dynamic.php and then server different content for xyz.php using $_SERVER - where xyz.php is any arbitrary filename requested by a client. No problem so far. When a client connects to my WebDAV server they can list the contents of a directory, eg / or /dynamic.php/ - how do I intercept this request so I can dynamically generate a list of available files for the client (which requests this list using PROPFIND)?

    Read the article

  • What functionality does dynamic typing allow?

    - by Justin984
    I've been using python for a few days now and I think I understand the difference between dynamic and static typing. What I don't understand is under what circumstances it would be preferred. It is flexible and readable, but at the expense of more runtime checks and additional required unit testing. Aside from non-functional criteria like flexibility and readability, what reasons are there to choose dynamic typing? What can I do with dynamic typing that isn't possible otherwise? What specific code example can you think of that illustrates a concrete advantage of dynamic typing?

    Read the article

  • Javascript Implementation Patterns for Server-side MVC Websites

    - by tmo256
    I'm looking for information on common patterns for initializing and executing Javascript page by page in a "traditional" server-side MVC website architecture. A few months ago, my development team began, but abandoned, a major re-architecture of our company's primary web app, including a full front-end redesign. In the process, there was some debate about the architecture of the Javascript in the current version of the site, and whether it fit into a clear, modern design pattern. Now I've returned to the process of overhauling the front end of this and several other MVC websites (Ruby on Rails and MVC.net) to implement a responsive framework (Bootstrap), and in the process will again need to review then revamp and update a lot of Javascript. These web applications are NOT single-page Javascript applications (in fact, we are ripping out a lot of Ajax) or designed to require a Javascript MVC pattern; these apps are basically brochure, catalog and administrative sites that follow a server-side MVC pattern. The vast majority of the Javascript required is behavioral, pre-built plugins (JQuery and Bootstrap, et al) that execute on specific DOM nodes. I'm going to give a very brief (as brief as I can be) run-down of the current architecture only in order to illustrate the scope and type of paradigm I'm talking about. Hopefully, it will help you understand the nature of the patterns I'm looking for, but I'm not looking for commentary on the specifics of this code. What I've done in the past is relatively straight-forward and easy to maintain, but, as mentioned above, some of the other developers don't like the current architecture. Currently, on document ready, I execute whatever global Javascript needs to occur on every page, and then call a page-specific init function to initialize node-specific functionality, retrieving the init method from a JS object. On each page load, something like this will happen: $(document).ready(function(){ $('header').menuAction(); App.pages.executePage('home','show'); //dynamic from framework request object }); And the main App javascript is like App = { usefulGlobalVar: 0, pages: { executePage: function(action, controller) { // if exists, App.pages[action][controller].init() }, home: { show: { init: function() { $('#tabs').tabs(); //et. al }, normalizeName: function() { // dom-specific utility function that // doesn't require a full-blown component/class/module } }, edit: ... }, user_profile: ... } } Any common features and functionality requiring modularization or compotentizing is done as needed with prototyping. For common implementation of plugins, I often extend JQuery, so I can easily initialize a plugin with the same options throughout the site. For example, $('[data-tabs]').myTabs() with this code in a utility javascript file: (function($) { $.fn.myTabs = function() { this.tabs( { //...common options }); }; }) Pointers to articles, books or other discussions would be most welcome. Again, I am looking for a site-wide implementation pattern, NOT a JS MVC framework or general how-tos on creating JS classes or components. Thanks for your help!

    Read the article

  • How to solve JavaScript origin problem with an application and static file server

    - by recipriversexclusion
    In a system that I'm building I want to serve Static files (static HTML pages and a lot of images), and Dynamic XML generated by my servlet. The dynamic XML is generated from my database (through Hibernate) and I use Restlets to serve it in response to API calls. I want to create a static file server (e.g. Apache) so that this does not interfere with the dynamic server traffic. Currently both servers need to run on the same machine. I've never done something like this before and this is where I'm stuck: The static HTML pages contain JavaScript that makes API calls to the dynamic server. However, since the two servers operate on different ports, I get stuck with the same origin problem. How can this be solved? As a bonus, if you can point me to any resources that explain how to create such a static/dynamic content serving system, I'll be happy. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Advantages of using pure JavaScript over JQuery

    - by Shivan Dragon
    What are the advantages of using Javascript-only versus using JQuery-only? I have limited experience with JavaScript and JQuery coding. I've added bits and snippets of each to HTML pages but I've mostly coded server-side stuff in other languages. I've noticed that while you can theoretically do the same things using either of the two approaches (and of course you can even mix 'em up in the same project) there seems to be a tendency to always start using JQuery from the very beginning no-matter what the project demands are. So I'm simply wondering, are there any punctual benefits to not use JQuery-only but instead to just use plain old JavaScript? I know this looks like a non-question because it can be said about it that "there's no definite answer" or "it can be debated for ever", but I'm actually hoping for punctual answers such as "You can do this in one approach and you cannot do it with the other". ==EDIT== As per scrwtp's comment, I'm not referring just to the DOM Handling part. My question is rather: JQuery is a library. For Javascript. What I find strange about this library as opposed to other libraries for other languages is that in JQyery's case it seems to be designed to be able to use it exclusively and not need to touch Javascript directly. This is as opposed to let's say Hibernate and SQL, where even though the library (or rather framework in this case, but I think the analogy still applies) takes the handle on A LOT of aspects, you still get to use SQL when using it, at least for some fringe cases. However in JQuery & Javascript case, you could do anything you do with Javascript using only JQuery (or at least that's how it seems to me).

    Read the article

  • The importance of Design Patterns with Javascript, NodeJs et al

    - by Lewis
    With Javascript appearing to be the ubiquitous programming language of the web over the next few years, new frameworks popping up every five minutes and event driven programming taking a lead both server and client side: Do you as a Javascript developer consider the traditional Design Patterns as important or less important than they have been with other languages / environments?. Please name the top three design patterns you, as a Javascript developer use regularly and give an example of how they have helped in your Javascript development.

    Read the article

  • How to use javascript functions, defined in some external *.js file in browser's javascript console?

    - by Dmytro Tsiniavsky
    I would like to know is it possible to save some, for example,simplemath.js file with function ADD(a, b) { return a + b; } simple function, run opera's or some other browser's javascript console, include somehow this (simplemath.js) file, call ADD(2, 5), and get a result in console or execute javascript code on current web page and manipulate with it's content. How can I do that? How can I use javascript functions from external files in web-browser's javascript console?

    Read the article

  • Javascript click function not working

    - by Nabe
    I need to null the value in text box on click, currently I have written a code as such <div class="keyword_non"> <h1>Keywords : <a class="someClass question_off" title="Keywords "></a></h1> <h2><input type="text" name="kw1" value="one" /></h2> <h2><input type="text" name="kw2" value="two" /></h2> <h2><input type="text" name="kw3" value="three" /></h2> <h2><input type="text" name="kw4" value="four" /></h2> </div> <script type="text/javascript" src="/functions/javascript/custom/non_profit_edit.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="/functions/javascript/jquery-1.7.1.min.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="/functions/javascript/custom/jquery-ui-1.8.7.custom.min.js"></script> Inside non_profit_edit.js i have written as such $(document).ready(function(){ $(".kw1").click(function() { $(".kw1").val(" "); }); $(".kw2").click(function() { $(".kw2").val(" "); }); $(".kw3").click(function() { $(".kw3").val(" "); }); $(".kw4").click(function() { $(".kw4").val(" "); }); }); But write now its not working properly... Is this any browser issues or error in code..

    Read the article

  • JavaScript parser in JavaScript

    - by emk
    I need to add some lightweight syntactic sugar to JavaScript source code, and process it using a JavaScript-based build system. Are there any open source JavaScript parsers written in JavaScript? And are they reasonably fast when run on top of V8 or a similar high-performance JavaScript implementation? Thank you for any pointers you can provide!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >