Search Results

Search found 24406 results on 977 pages for 'javascript namespaces'.

Page 2/977 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• 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

• Textbox value to filter databound ListBox items using Javascript ?

  - by Ravikumar

  Hi Guys, I have a ListBox which is bound to a list of data items. Now I want the user to be able to filter the items shown in the ListBox based on the search expression typed in the TextBox. For each character typed in the TextBox, the ListBox items should change to show only the items matching the search expression. using Javascript ? regards ravi

  Read the article

• Java+DOM: How do I convert a DOM tree without namespaces to a namespace-aware DOM tree?

  - by java.is.for.desktop

  Hello, everyone! I receive a Document (DOM tree) from a certain API (not in JDK). Sadly, this Document is not namespace-aware. As far as I know DOM, once generated, namespace-awareness can't be "added" afterwards. When converting this Document using a Transformer to a string, the XML is correct. Elements have xmlns:... attributes and name prefixes. But from the DOM point of view, there are no namespaces and no prefixes. I need to be able to convert this Document into a new Document which is namespace-aware. Yes, I could do this by just converting it to a string and back to DOM with namespaces enabled. But: nodes of the original tree have user-objects set. Converting to string and back would make a mapping of these user-objects to the new Document very complicated, if not impossible. So I really need a way to convert non-namespace DOM to namespace DOM. Are there any more-or-less straightforward solutions for this? Worst case (what I'm hoping to avoid) would be to manually iterate through old Document tree and create new namespace-aware Node for each old Node. Doing so, one had to manually "parse" namespace prefixes, watch out for xmlns-attributes, and maintain a mapping between prefixes and namespace-URIs. Lots of things to go wrong.

  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

• With AMD style modules in JavaScript is there any benefit to namespaces?

  - by gman

  Coming from C++ originally and seeing lots of Java programmers doing the same we brought namespaces to JavaScript. See Google's closure library as an example where they have a main namespace, goog and under that many more namespaces like goog.async, goog.graphics But now, having learned the AMD style of requiring modules it seems like namespaces are kind of pointless in JavaScript. Not only pointless but even arguably an anti-pattern. What is AMD? It's a way of defining and including modules that removes all direct dependencies. Effectively you do this // some/module.js define([ 'name/of/needed/module', 'name/of/someother/needed/module', ], function( RefToNeededModule, RefToSomeOtherNeededModule) { ...code... return object or function }); This format lets the AMD support code know that this module needs name/of/needed/module.js and name/of/someother/needed/module.js loaded. The AMD code can load all the modules and then, assuming no circular dependencies, call the define function on each module in the correct order, record the object/function returned by the module as it calls them, and then call any other modules' define function with references to those modules. This seems to remove any need for namespaces. In your own code you can call the reference to any other module anything you want. For example if you had 2 string libraries, even if they define similar functions, as long as they follow the AMD pattern you can easily use both in the same module. No need for namespaces to solve that. It also means there's no hard coded dependencies. For example in Google's closure any module could directly reference another module with something like var value = goog.math.someMathFunc(otherValue) and if you're unlucky it will magically work where as with AMD style you'd have to explicitly include the math library otherwise the module wouldn't have a reference to it since there are no globals with AMD. On top of that dependency injection for testing becomes easy. None of the code in the AMD module references things by namespace so there is no hardcoded namespace paths, you can easily mock classes at testing time. Is there any other point to namespaces or is that something that C++ / Java programmers are bringing to JavaScript that arguably doesn't really belong?

  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 deal with presence or not of xml namespaces using xslt.

  - by Mycol

  I have some XML/TEI documents, and i'm writing an XSLT 2.0 to extract their content. Almost all TEI documents has no namespace, but one has the default namespace (xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"). So all documents has the same aspect, with unqulified tags like <TEI> or <teiHeader>, but if I try to extract the content, all works with "non-namespaced-documents", but nothing (of course) is extracted from the namespaced-document. So i used the attribute xpath-default-namespace="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" and now (of course) the only document working is the namespaced one. I can't edit documents at all, so what I'm asking is if there's a way to change dynamically the xpath-default-namespace in order to make work xpaths like //teiHeader both with namespaced and non-namespaced documents

  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

• Namespaces combined with TFS / Source Control explanation

  - by Christian

  As an ISV company we slowly run into the "structure your code"-issue. We mainly develop using Visual Studio 2008 and 2010 RC. Languages c# and vb.net. We have our own Team Foundation Server and of course we use Source Control. When we started developing based on the .NET Framework, we also begun using Namespaces in a primitive way. With the time we 'became more mature', i mean we learned to use the namespaces and we structured the code more and more, but only in the solution scope. Now we have about 100 different projects and solutions in our Source Safe. We realized that many of our own classes are coded very redundant, i mean, a Write2Log, GetExtensionFromFilename or similar Function can be found between one and 20 times in all these projects and solutions. So my idea is: Creating one single kind of root folder in Source Control and start an own namespace-hierarchy-structure below this root, let's name it CompanyName. A Write2Log class would then be found in CompanyName.System.Logging. Whenever we create a new solution or project and we need a log function, we will 'namespace' that solution and place it accordingly somewhere below the CompanyName root folder. To have the logging functionality we then import (add) the existing project to the solution. Those 20+ projects/solutions with the write2log class can then be maintained in one single place. To my questions: - is that a good idea, the philosophy of namespaces and source control? - There must be a good book explaining the Namespaces combined with Source Control, yes? any hints/directions/tips? - how do you manage your 50+ projects?

  Read the article

• How do you query namespaces with PHP/XPath/DOM

  - by Alsbury

  I am trying to query an XML document that uses namespaces. I have had success with xpath without namespaces, but no results with namespaces. This is a basic example of what I was trying. I have condensed it slightly, so there may be small issues in my sample that may detract from my actual problem. Sample XML: <?xml version="1.0"?> <sf:page> <sf:section> <sf:layout> <sf:p>My Content</sf:p> </sf:layout> </sf:section> </sf:page> Sample PHP Code: <?php $path = "index.xml"; $content = file_get_contents($path); $dom = new DOMDocument($content); $xpath = new DOMXPath($dom); $xpath->registerNamespace('sf', "http://developer.apple.com/namespaces/sf"); $p = $xpath->query("//sf:p", $dom); My result is that "p" is a "DOMNodeList Object ( )" and it's length is 0. Any help would be appreciated.

  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

• JavaScript constructors inside a namespace

  - by Joe

  I have read that creating a namespace for JavaScript projects helps to reduce conflicts with other libraries. I have some code with a lot of different types of objects for which I have defined constructor functions. Is it good practice to put these inside the namespace as well? For example: var shapes = { Rectangle: function(w, h) { this.width = w; this.height = h; } }; which can be called via: var square = new shapes.Rectangle(10,10);

  Read the article

• Can google “see” this custom javascript code which displays links from an external site to mine

  - by webmasters

  I have a javascript code on my site who displays links from another site. This is what I have on my source before: <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript">showLink(1);</script> This is what I have copied from my source after the page has loaded: <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript">showLink(1);</script><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" class="anc" href="http://x5.external_site.net/sc/out.php?s=5483&amp;o=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.bluetooth.com">Bluetooth Devices</a> Can google see this link?

  Read the article

• extjs - 'Store is undefined'

  - by Jamie

  Hi all, I'm pretty sure this a trivial problem and i'm just being a bit stupid. Your help would be hugely appreciated. In controls/dashboard.js I have: Ext.ill.WCSS.controls.dashboard = { xtype:'portal', region:'center', margins:'35 5 5 0', items:[{ columnWidth: 1, style:'padding:10px', items:[{ title: 'My Cluster Jobs', layout:'fit', html: "test" }] },{ columnWidth: 1, style:'padding:10px', items:[{ title: 'All Cluster Jobs', iconCls: 'icon-queue', html: "test", items: new Ext.grid.GridPanel({ title: 'Cluster Job Queue', store: Ext.ill.WCSS.stores.dashboardClusterJobs, width: 791, height: 333, frame: true, loadMask: true, stateful: false, autoHeight: true, stripeRows: true, floating: false, footer: false, collapsible: false, animCollapse: false, titleCollapse: false, columns:[ { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'Job ID', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'JB_job_number', fixed: false }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'Priority', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'JAT_prio', fixed: false }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'User', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'JB_owner' }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'State', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'state' }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'Date Submitted', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'JAT_start_time' }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'Queue', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'queue_name' }, { xtype: 'gridcolumn', header: 'CPUs', sortable: true, resizable: true, width: 100, dataIndex: 'slots' } ], bbar: { xtype: 'paging', store: 'storeClusterQueue', displayInfo: true, refreshText: 'Retrieving queue status...', emptyMsg: 'No jobs to retrieve', id: 'clusterQueuePaging' } }) }] }] }; Simple enough, note the reference to 'Ext.ill.WCSS.stores.dashboardClusterJobs' So in stores/dashboard.js I just have this: Ext.ill.WCSS.stores.dashboardClusterJobs = new Ext.data.XmlStore({ storeId: 'storeClusterJobs', record: 'job_list', autoLoad: true, url: 'joblist.xml', idPath: 'job_info', remoteSort: false, fields: [ { name: 'JB_job_number' }, { name: 'JAT_prio' }, { name: 'JB_name' }, { name: 'JB_owner' }, { name: 'state' }, { name: 'JAT_start_time' }, { name: 'slots' }, { name: 'queue_name' } ] }); I run the code and I get 'store is undefined' :S It's confusing me a lot. All of the javascripts have been included in the correct order. i.e. <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/portal.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/stores/dashboard.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="/js/controls/dashboard.js"></script> Thanks guys!

  Read the article

• Focus on Javascript or Jquery?

  - by daxflame

  Hello, I am a student in college, and I notice that a lot of companies look for people who have experience with Javascript. Does this include Javascript's libraries, like JQuery? Or, are they looking for Javascript people only? It probably depends on the company, but what is the general advice for a student wanting to do some front end work? Is Javascript more powerful than JQuery? I know Jquery is a library and simplifies many tasks, but is there some reason why you would use Javascript over Jquery?

  Read the article

• Why is HTML/Javascript minification beneficial

  - by Channel72

  Why is HTML/Javascript minification beneficial when the HTTP protocol already supports gzip data compression? I realize that Javascript/HTML minification has the potential to significantly reduce the size of Javascript/HTML files by removing unnecessary whitespace, and perhaps renaming variables to a few letters each, but doesn't the LZW algorithm do especially well when there are many repeated characters (e.g. lots of whitespace?) I realize that some Javascript minification tools do more than just reduce size. Google's closure compiler, for example, also tries to improve code performance by inlining functions and doing other analyses. But the primary purpose of Javascript minification is usually to reduce file size. I also realize there are other reasons you might want to minify aside from performace, such as code obfuscation. But again, that reason is not usually emphasized as much as performance gain and file size reduction. For example, Closure Compiler is not advertised as an obfuscation tool, but as a code size reducer and download-speed enhancer. So, how much performance do you really gain from Javascript/HTML minification when you're already significantly reducing file size with gzip compression?

  Read the article

• How important is graceful degradation of JavaScript? [closed]

  - by Stephen

  Should web developers continue to spend effort progressively enhancing our web applications with JavaScript, ensuring that features gracefully degrade, thereby ensuring accessibility? Or should we spend that time focused on new features or other areas of development? The subtext of that question would be: How many of our customers/clients/users utilize our websites or applications with JavaScript disabled? Do you have any projects with requirements that specifically demand JavaScript functionality (almost all of mine do), and do those requirements also demand graceful degradation? For the sake of asking this question, I pulled up programmers.stackexchange.com without JavaScript enabled, and I was greeted with this message: "Programmers - Stack Exchange works best with JavaScript enabled". It was difficult to log in, albeit the site seemed to generally work okay. (I wasn't able to vote up any questions.) I think this is a satisfactory approach to development. Imagine the effort involved in making all of the site's features work with plain old HTML and server-side logic. On the other hand, I wonder how many users have been alienated by this approach. We've all been trained (at least the good developers among us) to use progressive enhancement and to ensure our web applications' dynamic features degrade gracefully. Is this progressive enhancement just pissing into the wind, or do some of our customers actually utilize certain web services without JavaScript enabled?

  Read the article

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