Search Results

Search found 37844 results on 1514 pages for 'function composition'.

Page 228/1514 | < Previous Page | 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235  | Next Page >

  • Php: Overriding abstract method goes wrong

    - by Lu4
    Hi! I think there is a problem in php's OOP implementation. EDIT: Consider more illustrative example: abstract class Animal { public $name; // public function Communicate(Animal $partner) {} // Works public abstract function Communicate(Animal $partner); // Gives error } class Panda extends Animal { public function Communicate(Panda $partner) { echo "Hi {$partner->name} I'm a Panda"; } } class Human extends Animal { public function Communicate(Human $partner) { echo "Hi {$partner->name} I'm a Human"; } } $john = new Human(); $john->name = 'John'; $mary = new Human(); $mary->name = 'Mary'; $john->Communicate($mary); // should be ok $zuzi = new Panda(); $zuzi->name = 'Zuzi'; $zuzi->Communicate($john); // should give error The problem is that when Animal::Communicate is an abstract method, php tells that the following methods are illegal: "public function Communicate(Panda $partner)" "public function Communicate(Human $partner)" but when Animal::Communicate is non-abstract but has zero-implementation Php thinks that these methods are legal. So in my opinion it's not right because we are doing override in both cases, and these both cases are equal, so it seems like it's a bug... Older part of the post: Please consider the following code: Framework.php namespace A { class Component { ... } abstract class Decorator { public abstract function Decorate(\A\Component $component); } } Implementation.php namespace B { class MyComponent extends \A\Component { ... } } MyDecorator.php namespace A { class MyDecorator extends Decorator { public function Decorate(\B\MyComponent $component) { ... } } } The following code gives error in MyDecorator.php telling Fatal error: Declaration of MyDecorator::Decorate() must be compatible with that of A\Decorator::Decorate() in MyDecorator.php on line ... But when I change the Framework.php::Decorator class to the following implementation: abstract class Decorator { public function Decorate(\A\Component $component) {} } the problem disappears.

    Read the article

  • Javascript doesnt update

    - by Trikam
    Hi all, I have a function that passes a parameter which is a function call and then i use setTimeout to call this passed function call. now i tried two methods with setTimout to raise the event and i used function.call(). When this passed parameter function call was raised none of the javascript was being updated, below is the javascript which im using to raise the event and the javascript which is supposed to be updated: The function being passed is [context] - function() { ErrorMessageFileSelect('diverrortextchoosechannal','The file chosen is to big, you must choose a file less than 1MB'); } function FileSizeOnLoad(contentLength,context) { if (context != null) { // context.call(); setTimeout(context,0); // or context.call(); } else { $('#inputHiddenFileSizeField').val(contentLength); DisplayChoseFileInformation(contentLength); } } //this is where the update should happen function ErrorMessageFileSelect(className, errorMessage) { $('div.' + className).text(errorMessage); alert($('div.' + className).text()); } Is there somthing im missing, can someone help me with this issue please. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Inheritance of closure objects and overriding of methods

    - by bobikk
    I need to extend a class, which is encapsulated in a closure. This base class is following: var PageController = (function(){ // private static variable var _current_view; return function(request, new_view) { ... // priveleged public function, which has access to the _current_view this.execute = function() { alert("PageController::execute"); } } })(); Inheritance is realised using the following function: function extend(subClass, superClass){ var F = function(){ }; F.prototype = superClass.prototype; subClass.prototype = new F(); subClass.prototype.constructor = subClass; subClass.superclass = superClass.prototype; StartController.cache = ''; if (superClass.prototype.constructor == Object.prototype.constructor) { superClass.prototype.constructor = superClass; } } I subclass the PageController: var StartController = function(request){ // calling the constructor of the super class StartController.superclass.constructor.call(this, request, 'start-view'); } // extending the objects extend(StartController, PageController); // overriding the PageController::execute StartController.prototype.execute = function() { alert('StartController::execute'); } Inheritance is working. I can call every PageController's method from StartController's instance. However, method overriding doesn't work: var startCont = new StartController(); startCont.execute(); alerts "PageController::execute". How should I override this method?

    Read the article

  • How can I create a new Person object correctly in Javascript?

    - by TimDog
    I'm still struggling with this concept. I have two different Person objects, very simply: ;Person1 = (function() { function P (fname, lname) { P.FirstName = fname; P.LastName = lname; return P; } P.FirstName = ''; P.LastName = ''; var prName = 'private'; P.showPrivate = function() { alert(prName); }; return P; })(); ;Person2 = (function() { var prName = 'private'; this.FirstName = ''; this.LastName = ''; this.showPrivate = function() { alert(prName); }; return function(fname, lname) { this.FirstName = fname; this.LastName = lname; } })(); And let's say I invoke them like this: var s = new Array(); //Person1 s.push(new Person1("sal", "smith")); s.push(new Person1("bill", "wonk")); alert(s[0].FirstName); alert(s[1].FirstName); s[1].showPrivate(); //Person2 s.push(new Person2("sal", "smith")); s.push(new Person2("bill", "wonk")); alert(s[2].FirstName); alert(s[3].FirstName); s[3].showPrivate(); The Person1 set alerts "bill" twice, then alerts "private" once -- so it recognizes the showPrivate function, but the local FirstName variable gets overwritten. The second Person2 set alerts "sal", then "bill", but it fails when the showPrivate function is called. The new keyword here works as I'd expect, but showPrivate (which I thought was a publicly exposed function within the closure) is apparently not public. I want to get my object to have distinct copies of all local variables and also expose public methods -- I've been studying closures quite a bit, but I'm still confused on this one. Thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • Ext JS 4: Show all columns in Ext.grid.Panel as custom option

    - by MacGyver
    Is there a function that can be called on an Ext.grid.Panel in ExtJS that will make all columns visible, if some of them are hidden by default? Whenever an end-user needs to show the hidden columns, they need to click each column. Below, I have some code to add a custom menu option when you select a field header. I'd like to execute this function so all columns show. As an example below, I have 'Project ID' and 'User Created' hidden by default. By choosing 'Select All Columns' would turn those columns on, so they show in the list view. listeners: { ... }, afterrender: function() { var menu = this.headerCt.getMenu(); menu.add([{ text: 'Select All Columns', handler: function() { var columnDataIndex = menu.activeHeader.dataIndex; alert('custom item for column "'+columnDataIndex+'" was pressed'); } }]); } } }); =========================== Answer (with code): Here's what I decided to do based on Eric's code below, since hiding all columns was silly. afterrender: function () { var menu = this.headerCt.getMenu(); menu.add([{ text: 'Show All Columns', handler: function () { var columnDataIndex = menu.activeHeader.dataIndex; Ext.each(grid.headerCt.getGridColumns(), function (column) { column.show(); }); } }]); menu.add([{ text: 'Hide All Columns Except This', handler: function () { var columnDataIndex = menu.activeHeader.dataIndex; alert(columnDataIndex); Ext.each(grid.headerCt.getGridColumns(), function (column) { if (column.dataIndex != columnDataIndex) { column.hide(); } }); } }]); }

    Read the article

  • HTML5 Database Transactions

    - by jiewmeng
    i am wondering abt the example W3C Offline Web Apps the example function renderNotes() { db.transaction(function(tx) { tx.executeSql('CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS Notes(title TEXT, body TEXT)', []); tx.executeSql(‘SELECT * FROM Notes’, [], function(tx, rs) { for(var i = 0; i < rs.rows.length; i++) { renderNote(rs.rows[i]); } }); }); } has the create table before the 'main' executeSql(). will it be better if i do something like $(function() { // create table 1st db.transaction(function(tx) { tx.executeSql('CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS Notes(title TEXT, body TEXT)', []); }); // when i execute say to select/modify data, i just do the actual action db.transaction(function(tx) { tx.executeSql(‘SELECT * FROM Notes’, [], function(tx, rs) { ... } }); db.transaction(function(tx) { tx.executeSql(‘INSERT ...’, [], function(tx, rs) { ... } }); }) i was thinking i don't need to keep repeating the CREATE IF NOT EXISTS right?

    Read the article

  • Problem adding and removing a jquery tab to the existing tabs dynamically.

    - by kranthi
    hi everyone, I have a href tag, upon clicking it a new jquery tab is added to the existing tabs,using the following js. $(function() { //DECLARE FUNCTION: removetab var removetab = function(tabselector, index) { $(".removetab").click(function(){ $(tabselector).tabs('remove',index); }); }; //create tabs $("#tabs").tabs({ add: function(event, ui) { //select newely opened tab $(this).tabs('select',ui.index); //load function to close tab removetab($(this), ui.index); }, show: function(event, ui) { //load function to close selected tabs removetab($(this), ui.index); } }); //load new tab $(".addtab").click(function(){ var href=$(this).attr("href"); var title=$(this).attr("title"); $("#tabs").tabs( 'add' , href , title+' <span class="removetab ui-icon ui-icon-circle-close" style="float:right; margin: -2px -10px 0px 3px; cursor:pointer;"></span>'); return false; }); }); and <a class="addtab" title="Tab Label" href="HTMLPage.htm">Add Tab</a> If the href attribute for 'a' tag corresponds to a '.htm' page I am able to add & remove the tab successfully.Where as if it corresponds to a '.aspx' page I am able to add a new tab ,but unable to remove the tab upon clicking on the 'close' sign next to the tab title. Please help. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Delphi : Handling the fact that Strings are not Objects

    - by awmross
    I am trying to write a function that takes any TList and returns a String representation of all the elements of the TList. I tried a function like so function ListToString(list:TList<TObject>):String; This works fine, except you can't pass a TList to it. E2010 Incompatible types: 'TList<System.TObject>' and 'TList<System.string>' In Delphi, a String is not an Object. To solve this, I've written a second function: function StringListToString(list:TList<string>):String; Is this the only solution? Are there other ways to treat a String as more 'object-like'? In a similar vein, I also wanted to write an 'equals' function to compare two TLists. Again I run into the same problem function AreListsEqual(list1:TList<TObject>; list2:TList<TObject>):boolean; Is there any way to write this function (perhaps using generics?) so it can also handle a TList? Are there any other tricks or 'best practises' I should know about when trying to create code that handles both Strings and Objects? Or do I just create two versions of every function? Can generics help? I am from a Java background but now work in Delphi. It seems they are lately adding a lot of things to Delphi from the Java world (or perhaps the C# world, which copied them from Java). Like adding equals() and hashcode() to TObject, and creating a generic Collections framework etc. I'm wondering if these additions are very practical if you can't use Strings with them.

    Read the article

  • Inereritance of clousure objects and overriding of methods

    - by bobikk
    I need to extend a class, which is encapsulated in a closure. This base class is following: var PageController = (function(){ // private static variable var _current_view; return function(request, new_view) { ... // priveleged public function, which has access to the _current_view this.execute = function() { alert("PageController::execute"); } } })();` Inheritance is realised using the following function: function extend(subClass, superClass){ var F = function(){ }; F.prototype = superClass.prototype; subClass.prototype = new F(); subClass.prototype.constructor = subClass; subClass.superclass = superClass.prototype; StartController.cache = ''; if (superClass.prototype.constructor == Object.prototype.constructor) { superClass.prototype.constructor = superClass; } } I subclass the PageController: var StartController = function(request){ // calling the constructor of the super class StartController.superclass.constructor.call(this, request, 'start-view'); } // extending the objects extend(StartController, PageController); // overriding the PageController::execute StartController.prototype.execute = function() { alert('StartController::execute'); } Inheritance is working. I can call every PageController's method from StartController's instance. However, method overriding doesn't work: var startCont = new StartController(); startCont.execute(); alerts "PageController::execute". How should I override this method?

    Read the article

  • How do I convert an AMD module from a singleton to an instance?

    - by Jamie Ide
    I'm trying to convert a working Durandal view model module from a singleton to an instance. The original working version followed this pattern: define(['knockout'], function(ko) { var vm = { activate: activate, companyId: null; company: ko.observable({}) }; return vm; function activate(companyId) { vm.companyId = companyId; //get company data then vm.company(data); } } The new version exports a function so that I get a new instance on every request... define(['knockout'], function(ko) { var vm = function() { activate = activate; companyId = null; company = ko.observable({}); }; return vm; function activate(companyId) { vm.companyId = companyId; //get company data then vm.company(data); } } The error I'm getting is "object function () [...function signature...] has no method company on the line vm.company(data);. What am I doing wrong? Why can I set the property but can't access the knockout observable? How should I refactor the original code so that I get a new instance on every request? My efforts to simplify the code for this question hid the actual problem. My real code was using Q promises and calling two methods with Q.All. Since Q is in the global namespace, it couldn't resolve my viewmodel after converting to a function. Passing the view model to the methods called by Q resolved the problem.

    Read the article

  • c# multi inheritance

    - by user326839
    So ive got a base class which requires a Socket: class Sock { public Socket s; public Sock(Socket s) { this.s = s; } public virtual void Process(byte[] data) { } ... } then ive got another class. if a new socket gets accepted a new instance of this class will be created: class Game : Sock { public Random Random = new Random(); public Timerr Timers; public Test Test; public Game(Socket s) : base(s) { } public static void ReceiveNewSocket(object s) { Game Client = new Game((Socket)s); Client.Start(); } public override void Process(byte[] buf) { Timers = new Timerr(s); Test = new Test(s); Test.T(); } } in the Sock class ive got a virtual function that gets overwritten by the Game class.(Process function) in this function im calling a function from the Test Class(Test+ Timerr Class: class Test : Game { public Test(Socket s) : base(s) { } public void T() { Console.WriteLine(Random.Next(0, 10)); Timers.Start(); } } class Timerr : Game { public Timerr(Socket s) : base(s) { } public void Start() { Console.WriteLine("test"); } } ) So in the Process function im calling a function in Test. And in this function(T) i need to call a function from the Timerr Class.But the problem is its always NULL , although the constructor is called in Process. And e.g. the Random Class can be called, i guess its because its defined with the constructor.: public Random Random = new Random(); and thats why the other classes(without a constructor): public Timerr Timers; public Test Test; are always null in the inherited class Test.But its essentiel that i call other Methods of other classes in this function.How could i solve that?

    Read the article

  • Console Errors - Not a Jquery Guru Yet

    - by user2528902
    I am hoping that someone can help me to correct some issues that I am having with a custom script. I took over the management of a site and there seems to be an issue with the following code: /* jQUERY CUSTOM FUNCTION ------------------------------ */ jQuery(document).ready(function($) { $('.ngg-gallery-thumbnail-box').mouseenter(function(){ var elmID = "#"+this.id+" img"; $(elmID).fadeOut(300); }); $('.ngg-gallery-thumbnail-box').mouseleave(function(){ var elmID = "#"+this.id+" img"; $(elmID).fadeIn(300); }); var numbers = $('.ngg-gallery-thumbnail-box').size(); function A(i){ setInterval(function(){autoSlide(i)}, 7000); } A(0); function autoSlide(i) { var numbers = $('.ngg-gallery-thumbnail-box').size(); var elmCls = $("#ref").attr("class"); $(elmCls).fadeIn(300); var randNum = Math.floor((Math.random()*numbers)+1); var elmClass = ".elm"+randNum+" img"; $("#ref").attr("class", elmClass); $(elmClass).fadeOut(300); setInterval(function(){arguments.callee.caller(randNum)}, 7000); } }); The error that I am seeing in the console on Firebug is "TypeError: arguments.callee.caller is not a function. I am just getting started with jQuery and have no idea how to fix this issue. Any assistance with altering the code so that it still works but doesn't throw up all of these errors (if I load the site and let it sit in my browser for 10 minutes I have over 10000 errors in the console) would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Is this a good decorator pattern for javascript?

    - by Kucebe
    I need some simple objects that could become more complex later, with many different properties, so i thought to decorator pattern. I made this looking at Crockford's power constructor and object augmentation: //add property to object Object.prototype.addProperty = function(name, func){ for(propertyName in this){ if(propertyName == name){ throw new Error(propertyName + " is already defined"); } } this[name] = func; }; //constructor of base object var BaseConstructor = function(param){ var _privateVar = param; return{ getPrivateVar: function(){ return _privateVar; } }; }; //a simple decorator, adds one private attribute and one privileged method var simpleDecorator = function(obj, param){ var _privateVar = param; var privilegedMethod1 = function(){ return "privateVar of decorator is: " + _privateVar; }; obj.addProperty("privilegedMethod1", privilegedMethod1); return obj; } //a more complex decorator, adds public and private properties var complexDecorator = function(obj, param1, param2){ //private properties var _privateVar = param1; var _privateMethod = function(x){ for(var i=0; i<x; i++){ _privateVar += x; } return _privateVar; }; //public properties var publicVar = "I'm public"; obj.addProperty("publicVar", publicVar); var privilegedMethod2 = function(){ return _privateMethod(param2); }; obj.addProperty("privilegedMethod2", privilegedMethod2); var publicMethod = function(){ var temp = this.privilegedMethod2(); return "do something: " + temp + " - publicVar is: " + this.publicVar; }; obj.addProperty("publicMethod", publicMethod); return obj; } //new basic object var myObj = BaseConstructor("obj1"); //the basic object will be decorated var myObj = simpleDecorator(obj, "aParam"); //the basic object will be decorated with other properties var myObj = complexDecorator(obj, 2, 3); Is this a good way to have Decorator Pattern in javascript? Are there other better ways to do this?

    Read the article

  • PHP Overloading, singleton instance

    - by jamalali81
    I've sort of created my own MVC framework and am curious as to how other frameworks can send properties from the "controller" to the "view". Zend does something along the lines of $this->view->name = 'value'; My code is: file: services_hosting.php class services_hosting extends controller { function __construct($sMvcName) { parent::__construct($sMvcName); $this->setViewSettings(); } public function setViewSettings() { $p = new property; $p->banner = '/path/to/banners/home.jpg'; } } file: controller.php class controller { public $sMvcName = "home"; function __construct($sMvcName) { if ($sMvcName) { $this->sMvcName = $sMvcName; } include('path/to/views/view.phtml'); } public function renderContent() { include('path/to/views/'.$this->sMvcName.'.phtml'); } } file: property.php class property { private $data = array(); protected static $_instance = null; public static function getInstance() { if (null === self::$_instance) { self::$_instance = new self(); } return self::$_instance; } public function __set($name, $value) { $this->data[$name] = $value; } public function __get($name) { if (array_key_exists($name, $this->data)) { return $this->data[$name]; } } public function __isset($name) { return isset($this->data[$name]); } public function __unset($name) { unset($this->data[$name]); } } In my services_hosting.phtml "view" file I have: <img src="<?php echo $this->p->banner ?>" /> This just does not work. Am I doing something fundamentally wrong or is my logic incorrect? I seem to be going round in circles at the moment. Any help would be very much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to guarantee a unique id for multiple items using the same id variable at a point in

    - by Scarface
    First of all, do not be overwhelmed by the long code, I just put it for reference...I have a function that preg_replaces content and puts it in a jquery dialog box with a matching open-link. For example, if there is a paragraph with two matches, they will be put inside two divs, and a jquery dialog function will be echoed twice; one for each div. While this works for one match, if there are multiple matches, it does not. I am not sure how to distribute unique ids at a point in time for each of the divs and matching dialog open-scripts. Keep in mind, I removed the preg replace function since it kind of complicates the problem. If anyone has any ideas, they will be greatly appreciated. <?php $id=uniqid(); $id2=uniqid(); echo "<div id=\"$id2\"> </div>"; ?> $.ui.dialog.defaults.bgiframe = true; $(function() { $("<?php echo"#$id2"; ?>").dialog({hide: 'clip', modal: true ,width: 600,height: 350,position: 'center', show: 'clip',stack: true,title: 'title', minHeight: 25, minWidth: 100, autoOpen: false}); $('<?php echo"#$id"; ?>').click(function() { $('<?php echo"#$id2"; ?>').dialog('open'); }) .hover( function(){ $(this).addClass("ui-state-hover"); }, function(){ $(this).removeClass("ui-state-hover"); } ).mousedown(function(){ $(this).addClass("ui-state-active"); }) .mouseup(function(){ $(this).removeClass("ui-state-active"); }); });

    Read the article

  • OpenSocial create activity from submit click

    - by russp
    Hi I'm "playing with OpsnSocial" and think I get a lot of it (well thanks to Googles' bits) but one question if I may. Creating an activity Lets say I have a form like this (simple) <form> <input type="text" name="" id="testinput" value=""/> <input type="submit" name="" id="" value=""/> </form> And I want to post the value of the text field (and or a message i.e "just posted" to the "users" activity. Do I use a function like this? function createActivity() { if (viewer) { var activity = opensocial.newActivity({ title: viewer.getDisplayName() + ' VALUE FROM FORM '}); opensocial.requestCreateActivity(activity, "HIGH", function() { setTimeout(initAllData,1000); }); } }; If so, how do I pass the text field value to it - is it something like this? var testinput = document.getElementById("testinput"); so the function may look like function createActivity() { if (viewer) { var activity = opensocial.newActivity({ title: viewer.getDisplayName() + testinput }); opensocial.requestCreateActivity(activity, "HIGH", function() { setTimeout(initAllData,1000); }); } }; And how do I trigger the function by using the submit button. In my basic JQuery I would use $('#submitID').submit(function(){ 'bits in here '}); Is at "simple as that i.e. use the createActivity function and it will use the OS framework to "post" to the activity.xml

    Read the article

  • jQuery ajax form submit - how to ensure dynamically loaded form's action is used

    - by kenny99
    Hi, i'm having a problem with dynamically loaded forms - instead of using the action attribute of the newly loaded form, my jquery code is still using the action attribute of the first form loaded. I have the following code: //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); But when the next form is loaded, the above code does not pick up the new action attribute. I have tried adding the above code to my callback on successful ajax load (shown below), but this doesn't make any difference. Can anyone help? Many thanks function ajaxFormStage(url) { var $data = $('#main_body #content'); $.validationEngine.closePrompt('body'); //close any validation messages $data.fadeOut('fast', function(){ $data.load(url, function(){ $data.animate({ opacity: 'show' }, 'fast'); '); //generic ajax form handler - calls next page load on success $('input.next:not(#eligibility)').live("click", function(){ $(".form_container form").validationEngine({ ajaxSubmit: true, ajaxSubmitFile: $(this).attr('action'), success : function() { var url = $('input.next').attr('rel'); ajaxFormStage(url); }, failure : function() { } }); }); }); });

    Read the article

  • Wordpress OptimizePress (Theme) error when creating new page

    - by user594777
    I just installed WordPress newest version, also installed OptimizePress Theme. I am getting the following error when trying to add a new page in Word Press. Any help would be appreciated. Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clscustomfields.php on line 1578 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clscustomfields.php on line 1581 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clscustomfields.php on line 1584 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clsblogfields.php on line 174 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clsblogfields.php on line 177 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clsblogfields.php on line 180 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: Permission denied in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clslpcustomfields.php on line 1725 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clslpcustomfields.php on line 1728 Warning: mkdir() [function.mkdir]: No such file or directory in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clslpcustomfields.php on line 1731 Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clscustomfields.php:1578) in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 830 Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-content/themes/OptimizePress/admin/clscustomfields.php:1578) in /home/admin/domains/mywebsite.com/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 831

    Read the article

  • Javascript and jQuery (Fancybox) question

    - by songdogtech
    Javascript and jQuery (Fancybox) question I'm using the Javascript function below for Twitter sharing (as well as other services; the function code is simplified to just Twitter for this question) that grabs the to-be-shared page URL and title and it is invoked in the link with onclick. That results in the Twitter share page loading in a pop up browser window, i.e.<img src="/images/twitter_16.png" onclick="share.tw()" /> In order to be consistent with other design aspects of the site, what I'd like to be able to do is have the Twitter share page open not in a standard browser window but in a Fancybox (jQuery) window. Fancybox can load an external page in an iFrame when the img or href link contains a class (in this case class="iframe" ) in the link and in the document ready function in the header. Right now, of course, when I give the iframe class to the link that also has the onclick share.tw(), I get two popups: one browser window popup with the correct Twitter share page loaded, and a Fancybox jQuery popup that shows a site 404. How can I change the function to use Fancybox to present the Twitter share page? Is that a correct way to approach it? Or is there a better way, such as implementing the share function in jQuery, too? Thanks... Javascript share function: var share = { tw:function(title,url) { this.share('http://twitter.com/home?status=##URL##+##TITLE##',title,url); }, share:function(tpl,title,url) { if(!url) url = encodeURIComponent(window.location); if(!title) title = encodeURIComponent(document.title); tpl = tpl.replace("##URL##",url); tpl = tpl.replace("##TITLE##",title); window.open(tpl,"sharewindow"+tpl.substr(6,15),"width=640,height=480"); } }; It is invoked, i.e.: <img src="/images/twitter_16.png" onclick="share.tw()" /> Fancybox function, invoked by adding class="iframe" in the img or href link $(".iframe").fancybox({ 'width' : '100%', 'height' : '100%', 'autoScale' : false, 'transitionIn' : 'none', 'transitionOut' : 'none', 'type' : 'iframe' });

    Read the article

  • jQuery: bind generated elements

    - by superUntitled
    Hello, thank you for taking time to look at this. I am trying to code my very first jQuery plugin and have run into my first problem. The plugin is called like this <div id="kneel"></div> <script type="text/javascript"> $("#kneel").zod(1, { }); </script> It takes the first option (integer), and returns html content that is dynamically generated by php. The content that is generated needs to be bound by a variety of functions (such as disabling form buttons and click events that return ajax data. The plugin looks like this (I have included the whole plugin in case that matters)... (function( $ ){ $.fn.zod = function(id, options ) { var settings = { 'next_button_text': 'Next', 'submit_button_text': 'Submit' }; return this.each(function() { if ( options ) { $.extend( settings, options ); } // variables var obj = $(this); /* these functions contain html elements that are generated by the get() function below */ // disable some buttons $('div.bario').children('.button').attr('disabled', true); // once an option is selected, enable the button $('input[type="radio"]').live('click', function(e) { $('div.bario').children('.button').attr('disabled', false); }) // when a button is clicked, return some data $('.button').bind('click', function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $.getJSON('/returnSomeData.php, function(data) { $('.text').html('<p>Hello: ' + data + '</p>'); }); // generate content, this is the content that needs binding... $.get('http://example.com/script.php?id='+id, function(data) { $(obj).html(data); }); }); }; })( jQuery ); The problem I am having is that the functions created to run on generated content are not binding to the generated content. How do I bind the content created by the get() function?

    Read the article

  • Javascript Object Properties go to undefined after ajax request returns

    - by adasdas
    if you have an object and set a property for it, you can access that property in a function called on that object. but if you call a function and do an ajax request such that a different function is called from onreadystatechange, that secondary response function does not have access to the property. Thats a little confusing so see what I mean here. The property this.name is the one that changes. //from W3Schools website function getXHR(){if (window.XMLHttpRequest){return new XMLHttpRequest();}if (window.ActiveXObject){return new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");}return null;} function TestObject() { this.name = ""; //public var xhr = null; //private var response = function() //private { if(xhr.readyState > 3) { alert("B: my name is " + this.name); } } this.send = function() //public { alert("A: my name is " + this.name); if(xhr === null) { xhr = getXHR(); } var url = "http://google.com"; xhr.onreadystatechange = response; xhr.open("GET", url, true); xhr.send(null); } } var o = new TestObject(); o.name = "Ice Cube"; o.send(); Results are: A: my name is IceCube B: my name is undefined If response is public this happens as well. If xhr is public this also happens. Something occurs so that the response function called doesnt have access to the same parameters.

    Read the article

  • The best way to write a jQuery plugin - If there is such a way?

    - by Nick Lowman
    There are quite a few ways to write plugins i.e. here's a nice example and what I've seen quite a lot of lately is the following code pattern and it's used by Doug Neiner here; (function($){ $.formatLink = function(el, options){ var base = this; base.$el = $(el); base.el = el; base.$el.data("formatLink", base); base.init = function(){ base.options = $.extend({}, $.formatLink.defaultOptions, options); //code here } base.init(); }; $.formatLink.defaultOptions = { }; $.fn.formatLink = function(options){ return this.each(function(){ (new $.formatLink(this, options)); }); }; })(jQuery); So, can anyone tell me the benefits of using the pattern above rather than the one below. I can't see the point in calling the $.extend function for every element in the jQuery stack (above), where the example below only does this once and then works on the stack. To test it I created two plugins, using both patterns, which applied styles to about 5000 li elements and the code below took about 1 second whereas the pattern above took about 1.3 seconds. (function($){ $.fn.formatLink = function(options){ var options = $.extend({}, $.fn.formatLink.defaultOptions, options || {}); return this.each(function(){ //code here }); }); $.fn.formatLink.defaultOptions ={} })(jQuery);

    Read the article

  • Magic Method __set() on a Instantiated Object

    - by streetparade
    Ok i have a problem, sorry if i cant explaint it clear but the code speaks for its self. i have a class which generates objects from a given class name; Say we say the class is Modules: public function name($name) { $this->includeModule($name); try { $module = new ReflectionClass($name); $instance = $module->isInstantiable() ? $module->newInstance() : "Err"; $this->addDelegate($instance); } catch(Exception $e) { Modules::Name("Logger")->log($e->getMessage()); } return $this; } The AddDelegate Method: protected function addDelegate($delegate) { $this->aDelegates[] = $delegate; } The __call Method public function __call($methodName, $parameters) { $delegated = false; foreach ($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if(class_exists(get_class($delegate))) { if(method_exists($delegate,$methodName)) { $method = new ReflectionMethod(get_class($delegate), $methodName); $function = array($delegate, $methodName); return call_user_func_array($function, $parameters); } } } The __get Method public function __get($property) { foreach($this->aDelegates as $delegate) { if ($delegate->$property !== false) { return $delegate->$property; } } } All this works fine expect the function __set public function __set($property,$value) { //print_r($this->aDelegates); foreach($this->aDelegates as $k=>$delegate) { //print_r($k); //print_r($delegate); if (property_exists($delegate, $property)) { $delegate->$property = $value; } } //$this->addDelegate($delegate); print_r($this->aDelegates); } class tester { public function __set($name,$value) { self::$module->name(self::$name)->__set($name,$value); } } Module::test("logger")->log("test"); // this logs, it works echo Module::test("logger")->path; //prints /home/bla/test/ this is also correct But i cant set any value to class log like this Module::tester("logger")->path ="/home/bla/test/log/"; The path property of class logger is public so its not a problem of protected or private property access. How can i solve this issue? I hope i could explain my problem clear.

    Read the article

  • Why is my content being overwritten instead of replaced in jQuery/Ajax?

    - by Matt Nathanson
    I've got jquery being used in ajax to pass some contents into a database, my problem however has nothing to do with the db.. I have input fields in an id called #clientscontainer. When I click "save" in that container, it automatically refreshes the container correctly ... $('#clientscontainer').html(html); The problem is, a couple of those input fields (such as a description and title), have instances in another div that i want to refresh upon the save click. The other ID is: $('div#' + clientID') When I do $('div#' + clientID').html(html); it refreshes the content from clientscontainer in it instead of just the variables that I want to update. When I try to pass just the variable $(blurb).html(html); it updates the blurb but it ONLY displays that variable in the div# clientID div... whereas I just want to replace it. Here is the AJAX portion of the function ...//variables// dataToLoad = 'clientID=' + clientID + '&changeClient=yes' + '&project=' + descriptionSubTitle + '&campaign=' + descriptionTitle + '&label=' + descriptionLabel + '&descriptionedit=' + description + '&blurbedit=' + blurb; $.ajax({ type: 'post', url: ('/clients/controller.php'), datatype: 'html', data: dataToLoad, success: function(html){ dataToLoad = 'clientID=' + clientID + '&loadclient=yes&isCMS=' + editCMS; $.ajax({ type: 'post', url: '/clients/controller.php', datatype: 'html', data: dataToLoad, async: false, success: function(html){ //$('#clientscontainer').focus(function() {reInitialize()}); //$('#clientscontainer').ajaxComplete(function(){reInitialize()}); $('#clientscontainer').html(html); $('div#' + clientID).each(function(){ $('#editbutton').click(function() {EditEverything()}); } , error: function() { alert('An error occured! 222'); } });}, error: function() { alert('An error occured! 394'); } }); any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • What are the drawbacks of this Classing format?

    - by Keysle
    This is a 3 layer example of my classing format function __(_){return _.constructor} //class var _ = ( CLASS = function(){ this.variable = 0; this.sub = new CLASS.SUBCLASS(); }).prototype; _.func = function(){ alert('lvl'+this.variable); this.sub.func(); } _.divePeak = function(){ alert('lvl'+this.variable); this.sub.variable += 5; } //sub class _ = ( __(_).SUBCLASS = function(){ this.variable = 1; this.sub = new CLASS.SUBCLASS.DEEPCLASS(); }).prototype; _.func = function(){ alert('lvl'+this.variable); this.sub.func(); } //deep class _ = ( __(_).DEEPCLASS = function(){ this.variable = 2; }).prototype; _.func = function(){ alert('lvl'+this.variable); } Before you blow a gasket, let me explain myself. The purpose behind the underscores is to accelerate the time needed to specify functions for a class and also specify sub classes of a class. To me it's easier to read. I KNOW, this does interfere with underscore.js if you intend to use it in your classes. I'm sure _.js can be easily switched over to another $ymbol though ... oh wait, But I digress. Why have classes within a class? because solar.system() and social.system() mean two totally different things but it's convenient to use the same name. Why user underscores to manage the definition of the class? because "Solar.System.prototype" took me about 2 seconds to type out and 2 typos to correct. It also keeps all function names for all classes in the same column of texts, which is nice for legibility. All I'm doing is presenting my reasoning behind this method and why I came up with it. I'm 3 days into learning OO JS and I am very willing to accept that I might have messed up.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235  | Next Page >