Search Results

Search found 15743 results on 630 pages for 'js is bad'.

Page 54/630 | < Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >

  • VS2010 renders controls JS awkwardly

    - by Juergen Hoffmann
    I have created a Website Project in VS2010. My Controls are not rendered correctly. The JS that is produced is not correctly formatted. Here is an example: protected void Page_PreRender(object sender, EventArgs e) { if (!IsPostBack) { objListBox.Attributes.Add("onchange", "Control_doPostBack('" + objListBox.ClientID + "','ListBox_OnClick'); return false;"); objListBox.Attributes.Add("onblur", "Control_doPostBack('" + trListbox.ClientID + "','ListBox_OnBlur'); return false;"); img.Attributes.Add("onclick", "Control_doPostBack('" + trListbox.ClientID + "','IMG_OnClick'); return false;"); } } and the responding control is rendered as: <select size="4" name="ctl00$PlaceHolder_Content$drop$objListBox" onchange="Control_doPostBack(&#39;PlaceHolder_Content_drop_objListBox&#39;,&#39;ListBox_OnClick&#39;); return false;setTimeout(&#39;__doPostBack(\&#39;ctl00$PlaceHolder_Content$drop$objListBox\&#39;,\&#39;\&#39;)&#39;, 0)" id="PlaceHolder_Content_drop_objListBox" onblur="Control_doPostBack(&#39;PlaceHolder_Content_drop_trListbox&#39;,&#39;ListBox_OnBlur&#39;); return false;" style="position:absolute;"> </select> As you can see, the ' are rendered to &#39 which screwes up the Browser. Is there a tweak to msbuild or inside the project properties? Any help is highly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC, JS injection and System.ArgumentException - Illegal Characters in path

    - by Mose
    Hi, In my ASP.Net MVC application, I use custom error handling. I want to perform custom actions for each error case I meet in my application. So I override Application_Error, get the Server.GetLastError(); and do my business depending on the exception, the current user, the current URL (the application runs on many domains), the user IP, and many others. Obviousely, the application is often the target of hackers. In almost all the case it's not a problem to detect and manage it, but for some JS URL attacks, my error handling does not perform what I want it to do. Ex (from logs) : http://localhost:1809/Scripts/]||!o.support.htmlSerialize&&[1 When I got such an URL, an exception is raised when accessing the ConnectionStrings section in the web.config, and I can't even redirect to another URL. It leads to a "System.ArgumentException - Illegal Characters in path, etc." The screenshot below shows the problem : http://screencast.com/t/Y2I1YWU4 An obvious solution is to write a HTTP module to filter the urls before they reach my application, but I'd like to avoid it because : I like having the whole security being managed in one place (in the Application_Error() method) In the module I cannot access the whole data I have in the application itself (application specific data I don't want to debate here) Questions : Did you meet this problem ? How did you manage it ? Thanks for you suggestions, Mose

    Read the article

  • Function in JS returns undefined

    - by megapool020
    Hello there, I have the following problem. The alert allways returns undefined, but I know it has a value. What am I doing wrong. I'm out of solutions... I'm using JQUERY jquery-1.4.2.min.js Tnx in advance $(document).ready(function(){ $('#generateButton').click(createIBAN); }); function createIBAN(){ //---- First check if a bank has been selected, //---- if not, then show error if($('#selectBank').val()==''){ alert('Selecte a bank!'); }else{ var bankAccount = generateBankAccount(); alert(bankAccount); } return false; } function generateBankAccount(){ //---- Create "elfproef" bankaccount var bankAccount = ''; //---- Set the amount of digits in a bankaccount digitAmount = 9; //---- Make random digitstring for (var i = 0; i < digitAmount; i++) { bankAccount += Math.floor(Math.random() * digitAmount); } //---- validate the string, if not "elf-proef" if (elfProef(bankAccount)==false) { //---- regenerate the string generateBankAccount(); }else{ return bankAccount; } } function elfProef(bankAccount) { //---- set sum to 0 and start the for-loop for counting var sum = 0; for (var i = 0; i < digitAmount; i++) { //---- for every digit multiply it times 9 - number //---- of the digit and count it to the sum var sum += bankAccount.charAt(i) * (digitAmount - i); } //---- Check if sum can be devided by 11 without having ##,## if(sum % 11==0){ //---- return true means string is "elf-proef" return true; }else { //---- String is not "elf-proef", try again return false; } }

    Read the article

  • WCF REST adding data using POST or PUT 400 Bad Request

    - by user55474
    HI How do i add data using wcf rest architecture. I dont want to use the channelfactory to call my method. Something similar to the webrequest and webresponse used for GET. Something similar to the ajax WebServiceProxy restInvoke Or do i always have to use the Webchannelfactory implementation I am getting a 400 BAD request by using the following Dim url As String = "http://localhost:4475/Service.svc/Entity/Add" Dim req As WebRequest = WebRequest.Create(url) req.Method = "POST" req.ContentType = "application/xml; charset=utf-8" req.Timeout = 30000 req.Headers.Add("SOAPAction", url) Dim xEle As XElement xEle = <Entity xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"> <Name>Entity1</Name> </Entity> Dim sXML As String = xEle .Value req.ContentLength = sXML.Length Dim sw As New System.IO.StreamWriter(req.GetRequestStream()) sw.Write(sXML) sw.Close() Dim res as HttpWebResponse = req.GetResponse() Sercice Contract is as follows <OperationContract()> _ <WebInvoke(Method:="PUT", UriTemplate:="Entity/Add")> _ Function AddEntity(ByVal e1 As Entity) DataContract is as follows <Serializable()> _ <DataContract()> _ Public Class Entity private m_Name as String <DataMember()> _ Public Property Name() As String Get Return m_Name End Get Set(ByVal value As String) m_Name = value End Set End Property End Class thanks

    Read the article

  • Amazone API ItemSearch returns (400) Bad Request.

    - by BuzzBubba
    I'm using a simple example from Amazon documentation for ItemSearch and I get a strange error: "The remote server returned an unexpected response: (400) Bad Request." This is the code: public static void Main() { //Remember to create an instance of the amazon service, including you Access ID. AWSECommerceServicePortTypeClient service = new AWSECommerceServicePortTypeClient(new BasicHttpBinding(), new EndpointAddress( "http://webservices.amazon.com/onca/soap?Service=AWSECommerceService")); AWSECommerceServicePortTypeClient client = new AWSECommerceServicePortTypeClient( new BasicHttpBinding(), new EndpointAddress("http://webservices.amazon.com/onca/soap?Service=AWSECommerceService")); // prepare an ItemSearch request ItemSearchRequest request = new ItemSearchRequest(); request.SearchIndex = "Books"; request.Title = "Harry+Potter"; request.ResponseGroup = new string[] { "Small" }; ItemSearch itemSearch = new ItemSearch(); itemSearch.Request = new ItemSearchRequest[] { request }; itemSearch.AWSAccessKeyId = accessKeyId; // issue the ItemSearch request try { ItemSearchResponse response = client.ItemSearch(itemSearch); // write out the results foreach (var item in response.Items[0].Item) { Console.WriteLine(item.ItemAttributes.Title); } } catch(Exception e) { Console.ForegroundColor = ConsoleColor.Red; Console.WriteLine(e.Message); Console.ForegroundColor = ConsoleColor.White; Console.WriteLine("Press any key to quit..."); Clipboard.SetText(e.Message); } Console.ReadKey(); What is wrong?

    Read the article

  • Is there a Firebug console -vsdoc.js?

    - by David Murdoch
    If not, does anyone care to write one? I would do it myself...but I don't have time right now...maybe next week (unless someone beats me to it). If you are bored and want to compile the vsdoc: Here is the Firebug API. Here is a blog post about the format for VS doc comments for intellisense. Here is an example vsdoc (jquery-1.4.1-vsdoc.js). I created the following because I kept typing cosnole instead of console. You can use it as a starting point (ish). console = { /// <summary> /// 1: The javascript console /// </summary> /// <returns type="Object" /> }; console.log = function (object) { /// <summary> /// Write to the console's log /// </summary> /// <returns type="null" /> /// <param name="object" type="Object"> /// Write the object to the console's log /// </param> };

    Read the article

  • VSC++, virtual method at bad adress, curious bug

    - by antoon.groenewoud
    Hello, This guy: virtual phTreeClass* GetTreeClass() const { return (phTreeClass*)m_entity_class; } When called, crashed the program with an access violation, even after a full recompile. All member functions and virtual member functions had correct memory adresses (I hovered mouse over the methods in debug mode), but this function had a bad memory adress: 0xfffffffc. Everything looked okay: the 'this' pointer, and everything works fine up until this function call. This function is also pretty old and I didn't change it for a long time. The problem just suddenly popped up after some work, which I commented all out to see what was doing it, without any success. So I removed the virtual, compiled, and it works fine. I add virtual, compiled, and it still works fine! I basically changed nothing, and remember that I did do a full recompile earlier, and still had the error back then. I wasn't able to reproduce the problem. But now it is back. I didn't change anything. Removing virtual fixes the problem. Sincerely, Antoon

    Read the article

  • SetInterval missing property in js class

    - by sebastian
    I wrote simple class in JS witch works, but i had problem when i try use setInterval with it. Ex. if i do something like that ball = new ball(5,10,0, '#canvas'); ball.draw(); ball.draw(); ball.draw(); ball.draw(); It works. But this: ball = new ball(5,10,0, '#canvas'); setInterval(ball.draw, 100); Not work. I get error that values are undefined. function ball (x,y,z,holdingEl) { this.r = 5; //zmienna przechowujaca promien pilki this.size = this.r *2; // zmienna przechowujaca rozmiar this.ballSpeed = 100; // predkosc pilki this.ballWeight = 0.45; // masa pilki this.maxFootContactTime = 0.2; // maksymalny czas kontaktu pilki z noga - stala this.ctx = jQuery(holdingEl)[0].getContext("2d"); // obiekt pilki this.intVal = 100 // predkosc odswiezania this.currentPos = { // wspolrzedne pozycji x: x, y: y, z: z } this.interactionPos = { // wspolrzedne pozycji ostatniej interakcji x: -1, y: -1, z: -1 } this.direct = { // kierunek w kazdej plaszczyznie x : 1, y : 0, z : 0 } this.draw = function (){ this.ctx.clearRect(0,0,1100,800); this.ctx.beginPath(); this.ctx.arc(this.currentPos.x, this.currentPos.y, this.r, 0, Math.PI*2, true); this.ctx.closePath(); this.ctx.fill(); } }

    Read the article

  • Reading a binary file in perl: Bad File Descriptor

    - by Magicked
    I'm trying to read a binary file 40 bytes at a time, then check to see if all those bytes are 0x00, and if so ignore them. If not, it will write them back out to another file (basically just cutting out large blocks of null bytes). This may not be the most efficient way to do this, but I'm not worried about that. However, right now I'm getting a "Bad File Descriptor" error and I cannot figure out why. my $comp = "\x00" * 40; my $byte_count = 0; my $infile = "/home/magicked/image1"; my $outfile = "/home/magicked/image1_short"; open IN, "<$infile"; open OUT, ">$outfile"; binmode IN; binmode OUT; my ($buf, $data, $n); while (read (IN, $buf, 40)) { ### Problem is here ### $boo = 1; for ($i = 0; $i < 40; $i++) { if ($comp[$i] != $buf[$i]) { $i = 40; print OUT $buf; $byte_count += 40; } } } die "Problems! $!\n" if $!; close OUT; close IN; I marked with a comment where it is breaking. Thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • Is Assert.Fail() considered bad practice?

    - by Mendelt
    I use Assert.Fail a lot when doing TDD. I'm usually working on one test at a time but when I get ideas for things I want to implement later I quickly write an empty test where the name of the test method indicates what I want to implement as sort of a todo-list. To make sure I don't forget I put an Assert.Fail() in the body. When trying out xUnit.Net I found they hadn't implemented Assert.Fail. Of course you can always Assert.IsTrue(false) but this doesn't communicate my intention as well. I got the impression Assert.Fail wasn't implemented on purpose. Is this considered bad practice? If so why? @Martin Meredith That's not exactly what I do. I do write a test first and then implement code to make it work. Usually I think of several tests at once. Or I think about a test to write when I'm working on something else. That's when I write an empty failing test to remember. By the time I get to writing the test I neatly work test-first. @Jimmeh That looks like a good idea. Ignored tests don't fail but they still show up in a separate list. Have to try that out. @Matt Howells Great Idea. NotImplementedException communicates intention better than assert.Fail() in this case @Mitch Wheat That's what I was looking for. It seems it was left out to prevent it being abused in another way I abuse it.

    Read the article

  • IOS : BAD ACCESS when trying to add a new Entity object

    - by Maverick447
    So i'm using coredata to model my relationships . This is the model in brief Type A can have one or more types of type B Type B has a inverse relationship of being associated with one of type A Type B can have one or more types of type C Type C has a inverse relationship of being associated with one of type B From a UI standpoint , I have a Navigation controller with controllers that successively sets up the first A object (VC-1) , then another viewcontroller (VC-2) creates a B object ( I pass in the A object to this controller) and the B object is added to the A object . Similarly the same thing happens with B and C . The third Viewcontroller (VC3) first creates a C object and assigns it to the passed B Object . Also between these viewcontrollers the managedObjectCOntext is also passed . SO my use case is such that while viewcontroller (VC-3) is the top controller a button action will keep creating multiple objects of type C and add them to the same type B object that was passed . Also as part of this function I save the managedObject context after saving each type C . e.g. code in viewcontroller 3 - (void) SaveNewTypeC { TypeC *newtypeC = (Question*)[NSEntityDescription insertNewObjectForEntityForName:@"TypeC" inManagedObjectContext:managedObjectContext]; [newtypeC setProp1:] ; [newtypeC setProp2:] .. .. **[typeBObject addTypeCInTypeBObject:newtypeC];** [section setTotalCObjectCount:[ NSNumber numberWithInt:typeCIndex++]]; NSError *error = nil; if (![managedObjectContext save:&error]) { // Handle error NSLog(@"Unresolved error %@, %@, %@", error, [error userInfo],[error localizedDescription]); exit(-1); // Fail } [newtypeC release]; } - (IBAction)selectedNewButton:(id)sender { [self SaveNewTypeC]; [self startRepeatingTimer]; } The BAD ACCESS seems to appear when the bold line above executes Relating to some HashValue . Any clues on resolving this would be helpful .

    Read the article

  • How to implement conditional render in JS?

    - by mare
    Below is the JS (jQuery) code of autocomplete's result function. You can see there's some lines where I print out <li>s containing some data properties (that come in as a result of automcomplete's AJAX call). How could I rewrite this so that <li> would be conditionally rendered based on whether the property contains any value being either int or string (not empty string or whitespace) or something else that can be represented as string? $(".clients-dropdown").result(function (event, data, formatted) { if (data) { // set the hidden input that we need for Client entity rematerialize $(".client-id").val(data.client_id); if (data.ClientName && data.Address1 && data.postalcode && data.postname) { $(".client-address").html( "<li>" + data.ClientName + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.Address1 + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.postalcode + " " + data.postname + "</li>" ); $(".client-details").html( "<li>" + data.PrettyId + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.VatNo + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.Phone + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.Mobile + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.Email1 + "</li>" + "<li>" + data.Contact + "</li>" ); } } Also, for the AJAX call, should my server side action return null when there's a null for a property in the database or empty string?

    Read the article

  • Special Characters in JS, how to use "/" character

    - by user1461222
    I've vbulletin 4.2.0 i added an special button to it's editor with this article; http://www.vbulletinguru.com/2012/add-a-new-toolbar-button-to-ckeditor-tutorial/ The thing i want to do is add an syntax highlighter code with this button. When i use below code it's working fine; CKEDITOR.plugins.add( 'YourPluginName', { init: function( editor ) { editor.addCommand( 'SayHello', { exec : function( editor ) { editor.insertHtml( "Hello from my plugin" ); } }); editor.ui.addButton( 'YourPluginName', { label: 'My Button Tooltip', command: 'SayHello', icon: this.path + 'YourPluginImage.png' } ); } } ); so i changed this code to this, because i wannt to add specific text like below; CKEDITOR.plugins.add( 'DKODU', { init: function( editor ) { editor.addCommand( 'SayHello', { exec : function( editor ) { editor.insertHtml( '[kod=delphi][/kod]' ); } }); editor.ui.addButton( 'DKODU', { label: 'My Button Tooltip', command: 'SayHello', icon: this.path + 'star.png' } ); } } ); after update the code when i press the button nothings happen, i checked with google and this site but i couldn't figure it out i think i made mistake with some special characters but i couldn't find what's the problem. If i made some mistakes when i publish this question forgive me and also forgive me for my bad english, thanks.

    Read the article

  • Firefox extension js object initialization

    - by Michael
    Note: this is about Firefox extension, not a js general question. In Firefox extension project I need my javascript object to be initialized just once per Firefox window. Otherwise each time I open my window a new timers will be engaged, new properties will be used, so everything will start from scratch. hope example below will demystify my question :) var StupidExtension { statusBarValue: "Not Initialized Yet", startup: function () { ... // Show statusBarValue in Status Bar Panel }, initTimerToRetrieveStatusBarValueFromNetwork: function () { ... } } so each time you hit Ctrl+N a new window you will see "Not Initialized Yet" and then new timer will be fired, so after some time it retrieve data from network you will see value also on second window and so on. Ideally would be to have just a single timer function running and updating all status bar panels in all Firefox windows. Of course I can do some caching, like saving the value in prefs or some other storage, then show it from there. But I feel like this is artificial. So the question will be is there "native" technique of making static some parts of the object among all Firefox window instances?

    Read the article

  • JS: Object itteration fails

    - by Newbie
    Hello! In my JS, I have an object called box_object. It looks like this: ({ id:"3", text:"this is a box object", connection_parent:["1", "2"], connection_child:["5", "6"], connectiondata_child:{ 0:{id:"5", linepoint:"bottom"}, 1:{id:"6", linepoint:"bottom"}}, connectiondata_parent:{ 0:{id:"1", linepoint:"top"}, 1:{id:"2", linepoint:"top"}} }) Now, I want to add some position values to box_object.connectiondata_parent. Using jQuery I can use the .each() method. So I tried it, but it failed. In my function I do the following: $(box_object.connectiondata_parent).each(function(it, obj){ if(typeof(obj[it]) != "undefined" && obj[it].linepoint == "top"){ var point_position_top = new Object(); point_position_top.left = startingpoint_left; point_position_top.top = startingpoint_top; obj[it].position = point_position_top; }else if(typeof(obj[it]) != "undefined" && obj[it].linepoint == "bottom"){ var point_position_bottom = new Object(); point_position_bottom.left = startingpoint_left; point_position_bottom.top = startingpoint_bottom; obj[it].position = point_position_bottom; }else{} }); After the function my box_object looks like this: ({ id:"3", text:"this is third box", connection_parent:["1", "2"], connection_child:["5", "6"], connectiondata_child:{ 0:{id:"5", linepoint:"bottom"}, 1:{id:"6", linepoint:"bottom"}}, connectiondata_parent:{ 0:{id:"1", linepoint:"top", position:{left:500, top:104}}, 1:{id:"2", linepoint:"top"}} }) It seems it only writes the values to the first "value". Any Ideas why?

    Read the article

  • Is it bad practise to initialise fields outside of an explicit constructor

    - by MrTortoise
    So its monday and we are arguing about coding practises. The examples here are a litttle too simple, but the real deal has several constructors. In order to initialise the simple values (eg dates to their min value) I have moved the code out of the constructors and into the field definitions. public class ConstructorExample { string _string = "John"; } public class ConstructorExample2 { string _string; public ConstructorExample2() { _string = "John"; } } How should it be done by the book. I tend to be very case by case and so am maybe a little lax abotu this kind of thing. However i feel that accams razor tells me to move the initialisation out of multiple constructors. Of course I could always move this shared initialisation into a private method. The question is essentially ... is initialising fields where they are defined as opposed to the constructor bad in any way? The argument I am facing is one of error handling, but i do not feel it is relevant as there are no possible exceptions that won't be picked up at compile time.

    Read the article

  • Angular JS pagination after data loaded

    - by Federico Bucchi
    do you have any example of Angular JS elements pagination loaded from I file? I found this example: http://jsfiddle.net/SAWsA/11/ Now, instead of having this: $scope.items = [ {"id":"1","name":"name 1","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 1","field4":"field4 1","field5 ":"field5 1"}, {"id":"2","name":"name 2","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 2","field4":"field4 2","field5 ":"field5 2"}, {"id":"3","name":"name 3","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 3","field4":"field4 3","field5 ":"field5 3"}, {"id":"4","name":"name 4","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 4","field4":"field4 4","field5 ":"field5 4"}, {"id":"5","name":"name 5","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 5","field4":"field4 5","field5 ":"field5 5"}, {"id":"6","name":"name 6","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 6","field4":"field4 6","field5 ":"field5 6"}, {"id":"7","name":"name 7","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 7","field4":"field4 7","field5 ":"field5 7"}, {"id":"8","name":"name 8","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 8","field4":"field4 8","field5 ":"field5 8"}, {"id":"9","name":"name 9","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 9","field4":"field4 9","field5 ":"field5 9"}, {"id":"10","name":"name 10","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 10","field4":"field4 10","field5 ":"field5 10"}, {"id":"11","name":"name 11","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 11","field4":"field4 11","field5 ":"field5 11"}, {"id":"12","name":"name 12","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 12","field4":"field4 12","field5 ":"field5 12"}, {"id":"13","name":"name 13","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 13","field4":"field4 13","field5 ":"field5 13"}, {"id":"14","name":"name 14","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 14","field4":"field4 14","field5 ":"field5 14"}, {"id":"15","name":"name 15","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 15","field4":"field4 15","field5 ":"field5 15"}, {"id":"16","name":"name 16","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 16","field4":"field4 16","field5 ":"field5 16"}, {"id":"17","name":"name 17","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 17","field4":"field4 17","field5 ":"field5 17"}, {"id":"18","name":"name 18","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 18","field4":"field4 18","field5 ":"field5 18"}, {"id":"19","name":"name 19","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 19","field4":"field4 19","field5 ":"field5 19"}, {"id":"20","name":"name 20","description":"description 1","field3":"field3 20","field4":"field4 20","field5 ":"field5 20"} ]; I have to use something generated by: $http.get('/json/mocks/apps/applications.json') .then(function (result) { $scope.items = result.data.applications; }); How would you create the pagination waiting for the data loaded from $http.get?

    Read the article

  • Problems with my JS array undefined x 7

    - by Dave
    I have an array im trying to loop through to create a new type of array specific to my current page. My array looks like this: //$_SESSION['data'] = Array ( [0] => 1 [1] => 0 [2] => Tom [8] => 1 [4] => 1 [5] => Array ( [7] => Array ( [0] => Andrew [1] => 1 [2] => 1 [4] => 0 [5] => avatar.jpg [6] => 1 ) ) [6] => Array ( [0] => 1 [1] => 2 ) ) So in my JS file i have this: var stats = <? echo $_SESSION['data'][5]); ?> ; //this is the array my_data = new Array(); for(var key in stats){ if(key in my_data){} else { //prevent double entry my_data[key] = new Array(); my_data[key][0] = stats[key][6]; my_data[key][1] = stats[key][5]; my_data[key][2] = stats[key][2]; my_data[key][3] = stats[key][0]; } } console.log(my_data); Now in console.log i get this : [undefined × 7, Array[4] 0: "1" 1: "avatar.jpg" 2: "1" 3: "Andrew" length: 4 __proto__: Array[0] ] I'm wondering why it is saying undefined x7?

    Read the article

  • Large Switch statements: Bad OOP?

    - by Mystere Man
    I've always been of the opinion that large switch statements are a symptom of bad OOP design. In the past, I've read articles that discuss this topic and they have provided altnerative OOP based approaches, typically based on polymorphism to instantiate the right object to handle the case. I'm now in a situation that has a monsterous switch statement based on a stream of data from a TCP socket in which the protocol consists of basically newline terminated command, followed by lines of data, followed by an end marker. The command can be one of 100 different commands, so I'd like to find a way to reduce this monster switch statement to something more manageable. I've done some googling to find the solutions I recall, but sadly, Google has become a wasteland of irrelevant results for many kinds of queries these days. Are there any patterns for this sort of problem? Any suggestions on possible implementations? One thought I had was to use a dictionary lookup, matching the command text to the object type to instantiate. This has the nice advantage of merely creating a new object and inserting a new command/type in the table for any new commands. However, this also has the problem of type explosion. I now need 100 new classes, plus I have to find a way to interface them cleanly to the data model. Is the "one true switch statement" really the way to go? I'd appreciate your thoughts, opinions, or comments.

    Read the article

  • page loads twice due to js code

    - by Cristian Boariu
    Hi, I have this div inside a repeater, where i set the class, onmouseover and onmouseout properties from code behind: <div id="Div1" runat="server" class="<%# getClassProduct(Container.ItemIndex) %>" onmouseover="<%# getClassProductOver(Container.ItemIndex) %>" onmouseout="<%# getClassProductOut(Container.ItemIndex) %>"> codebehind: public String getClassProduct(Object index) { int indexItem = Int32.Parse(index.ToString()); if (indexItem == 3) return "produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem lastbox"; else return "produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem"; } public String getClassProductOver(Object index) { int indexItem = Int32.Parse(index.ToString()); if (indexItem == 3) return "this.className='produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem_ lastbox'"; else return "this.className='produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem_'"; } public String getClassProductOut(Object index) { int indexItem = Int32.Parse(index.ToString()); if (indexItem == 3) return "this.className='produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem lastbox'"; else return "this.className='produs_box produs_box_wrap overitem'"; } Well, the problem is that, my Page_Load is fired twice, and there i have some code which i want to execute only ONCE: if (!Page.IsPostBack) { ..code to execute once } This code is fired initially, and after the page is rendered, it is called again, and executed again due to that js... Anyone can recommend a workaround? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • UIWebview :: Text :: HTML :: JS

    - by user306089
    hello, 1- i load a text from a txt file 2- i show it into a html "file" 3- problem : 3-a : this code works : i create my page by code and i insert my text myText = ... loaded from an array of texts ...; NSString *myDescriptionHTML = [NSString stringWithFormat:@"<html> \n" "<head> \n" "<style type=\"text/css\"> \n" "body {font-family: \"%@\"; font-size: 1.0f + 'em'; color:#FFF;}\n" "</style> \n" "</head> \n" "<body id=\"myid\">%@</body> \n" "</html>", @"Arial", myText]; [self.myWebView loadHTMLString:myDescriptionHTML baseURL:nil]; 3-b but this one does not work : i load a html page already created and i inject my text into using JS : myText = ... loaded from an array of texts ...; [self.myWebView stringByEvaluatingJavaScriptFromString:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"document.getElementById(\"myid\").innerHTML = \"%@\";", myText]]; 3-c but this one working : same as 3-b but i init my text with a string in the code itself : myText = @"hello all"; [self.myWebView stringByEvaluatingJavaScriptFromString:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"document.getElementById(\"myid\").innerHTML = \"%@\";", myText]]; any help to understand what's wrong with 3-b ? thank you

    Read the article

  • Script (AJAX or JS) does not work properly in IE8

    - by Uno Mein Ame
    I have a js/ajax script at http://worldcitiesdatabase.info/test1/ I just received a complaint that it does not work properly in IE8. Onchange seems to work, but then the next menu is not populated. Can you please help me figure it out? Thanks Not sure what the problematic part of the code is. Here is my guess: if (window.XMLHttpRequest) {// code for IE7+, Firefox, Chrome, Opera, Safari xmlhttp=new XMLHttpRequest(); } else {// code for IE6, IE5 xmlhttp=new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP"); } newList=""; xmlhttp.onreadystatechange=function() { if (xmlhttp.readyState==4 && xmlhttp.status==200) { newList = xmlhttp.responseText; m1.innerHTML=newList; m1.disabled=false; } if (menuname=="showCountry") { var c1=document.getElementById('showRegion'); if (c1.options.length==2) { if (c1.options[0].value=='NONE') { c1.remove(0); c1.value='0'; reloadmenu(c1); } } } } xmlhttp.open("GET",newFile+".php?q="+menuvalue,true); xmlhttp.send();

    Read the article

  • Iterate over defined elements of a JS array

    - by sibidiba
    I'm using a JS array to Map IDs to actual elements, i.e. a key-value store. I would like to iterate over all elements. I tried several methods, but all have its caveats: for (var item in map) {...} Does iterates over all properties of the array, therefore it will include also functions and extensions to Array.prototype. For example someone dropping in the Prototype library in the future will brake existing code. var length = map.lenth; for (var i = 0; i < length; i++) { var item = map[i]; ... } does work but just like $.each(map, function(index, item) {...}); They iterate over the whole range of indexes 0..max(id) which has horrible drawbacks: var x = []; x[1]=1; x[10]=10; $.each(x, function(i,v) {console.log(i+": "+v);}); 0: undefined 1: 1 2: undefined 3: undefined 4: undefined 5: undefined 6: undefined 7: undefined 8: undefined 9: undefined 10: 10 Of course my IDs wont resemble a continuous sequence either. Moreover there can be huge gaps between them so skipping undefined in the latter case is unacceptable for performance reasons. How is it possible to safely iterate over only the defined elements of an array (in a way that works in all browsers and IE)?

    Read the article

  • Opera bug with JS autoselecting text (if more than 1 div)

    - by E L
    Here is HTML code. It supposed to select all text in "Container" div <B onclick="SelectText(document.getElementById('Container'));">select all text</B> <Div id="Container"> <Div>123456</Div> <Div>123456</Div> <Div onclick="SelectText();">123456</Div> </Div> here is JS code of the SelectText() function function SelectText(target){ if(target==null){ var e = window.event || e; if (!e) var e = window.event; var target=e.target || e.srcElement; } var rng, sel; if ( document.createRange ) { rng = document.createRange(); rng.selectNode( target ); sel = window.getSelection(); sel.removeAllRanges(); sel.addRange( rng ); } else { var rng = document.body.createTextRange(); rng.moveToElementText( target ); rng.select(); } } Problem is that in Opera 12.02 when "select all text" is clicked, all text seems like selected, but it's not selected (I can't rightclick it and copy). (terrific, but IE works fine with it) Why not in Opera?!!! And what can I do to make Opera 12.02 believe that all text in "Container" is selected?

    Read the article

  • JS best practice for member functions

    - by MickMalone1983
    I'm writing a little mobile games library, and I'm not sure the best practice for declaring member functions of instantiated function objects. For instance, I might create a simple object with one property, and a method to print it: function Foo(id){ this.id = id; this.print = function(){ console.log(this.id); }; }; However, a function which does not need access to 'private' members of the function does not need to be declared in the function at all. I could equally have written: function print(){ console.log(this.id); }; function Foo(id){ this.id = id; this.print = print; }; When the function is invoked through an instance of Foo, the instance becomes the context for this, so the output is the same in either case. I'm not entirely sure how memory is allocated with JS, and I can't find anything that I can understand about something this specific, but it seems to me that with the first example all members of Foo, including the print function, are duplicated each time it is instantiated - but with the second, it just gets a pointer to one, pre-declared function, which would save any more memory having to be allocated as more instances of Foo are created. Am I correct, and if I am, is there any memory/performance benefit to doing this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >