I am adding multiple SVGs dynamically, then modifying each of them. Without an event listener, the map was not being seen. Now, however, the event listener appears to create multiple instances of the last loop, instead of one for each loop, only the last instance gets modified, but multiple times with the same mygroup,svgID.
for (var i=0; i<path.length; i++) {
var mygroup = path[i], svgID = "svgMap" + i
const iSVG = document.createElement("object")
document.getElementById("summary-mygroup").appendChild(iSVG)
iSVG.id = svgID
iSVG.type = "image/svg+xml"
iSVG.data = "Maps/mygroup_basemap.svg"
iSVG.addEventListener('load', function(){
createMap(mygroup,svgID)
})
}
TL;DR:
use const instead of var
const mygroup = path[i], divID = "div" + i, svgID = "svgMap" + i
What you are seeing is due to function() using mygroup, divID , and svgID form the loop's scope which keeps updating until the functions execute (all with the latest value). This happens because the same variable is used.
var and const/let do not behave the same
var scopes to the function, whereas let/const are scoped to the block. (var also gets hoisted, but that's less related to the issue)
so if you run:
for (var i=0; i < 3; i++){
var b = i
setTimeout(function(){console.log(b)},1)// 😡 2,2,2
}
console.log("B:", b) // 😬 2
you wouldn't expect to have console.log("B:", b) run without an error, but it does, because the scope of var exists outside of the function.
whereas if you use let or const
for (var i=0; i < 3; i++){
let b = i;
setTimeout(function(){console.log(b)},1)// 👍 0,1,2
}
console.log("B:", b) // 👍 throws error
you will have expected behaviour, including an error on the console.log
And because it is a function-vs-block-scope issue, you could move the entire functionality inside a function and call it, which will lock the scope to the function:
for (var i=0; i < 3; i++){
(function(){
var b = i
setTimeout(function(){console.log(b)},1)// 👍 0,1,2
})()
}
Related
I want to get an element tag printed in the console just by clicking on it but it doesn't seem to work and I don't get why?
can anyone point the error in my logic?
let bodyChildren = document.body.children;
let bodyArr = Object.values(bodyChildren);
for (i = 0; i < bodyChildren.length; i++) {
bodyArr[i].onclick = function () {
console.log(bodyArr[i].tagName);
};
}
The problem is that when you define a function, everything in it is contained in a separate scope. Within the function bodyArr is not known. You can use this instead to refer to the clicked element, like below:
document.body.children will only refer to the direct children of the body element. If you want to refer to every element in the DOM, you can use document.getElementsByTagName("*") instead.
When the code is written globally, like in the snippet below, the variable bodyArr is actually available in the global scope, as is the variable i. But keep in mind that the code inside the function is only executed when an element is clicked. At that point in time the for loop has been fully executed leaving i with the value 3 (since in the snippet below the script tag also counts). bodyArr will always contain exactly 1 element less, no matter how many elements are in the DOM. In this case it has 3 elements with the last element being saved at position 2 (zero based) in the array, hence bodyArr[i] equals undefined.
let bodyChildren = document.body.children;
let bodyArr = Object.values(bodyChildren);
for (i = 0; i < bodyChildren.length; i++) {
bodyArr[i].onclick = function () {
console.log(this.tagName);
}
}
<span>child1</span>
<p>child2</p>
You need to get ALL elements from the document body and this is KEY: var all = document.getElementsByTagName("*");
var all = document.getElementsByTagName("*");
let bodyArr = Object.values(all);
for (i = 0; i < bodyArr.length; i++) {
bodyArr[i].onclick = function () {
console.log(this.tagName);
};
}
<span>Hello world</span>
I am using vue, vuedraggable and vuetify in my project.
I am not able to use let to define my index for my loop it always is undefined. This method is being called by an event from draggable. Using var instead of let works however.
Why is let always undefined?
Even when I directly assign the variable i to 1 it is still undefined. For example for(let i = 1; i < 2; i++) still results in i being equal to undefined inside the for loop.
This is where I am seeing the issue
updateOrderNumbers(draggedContext) {
if (draggedContext.index < draggedContext.futureIndex) {
for (let i = draggedContext.index; i < draggedContext.futureIndex; i++) {
let swapIndex = this.orderTableData[i].sortOrder;
this.orderTableData[i].sortOrder = this.orderTableData[i+1].sortOrder ;
this.orderTableData[i+1].sortOrder = swapIndex;
}
}
if (draggedContext.index > draggedContext.futureIndex) {
for (let i = draggedContext.index; i > draggedContext.futureIndex; i--) {
let swapIndex = this.orderTableData[i].sortOrder;
this.orderTableData[i].sortOrder = this.orderTableData[i+1].sortOrder;
this.orderTableData[i+1].sortOrder = swapIndex;
}
}
}
This method gets called from here
onMoveCallback(evt){
this.updateOrderNumbers(evt.draggedContext)
this.checkForChanges()
}
And here is the element that is triggering the call.
<draggable v-model="orderTableData" :move="onMoveCallback" tag="tbody">
It appears that FireFox and Chrome are unable to determine the value of a variable initialized with let inside of a for loop in this circumstance, but they are able to determine its value if you initialize the variable with var inside of the for loop.
I've written the functions below as part of a much larger application for processing FASTA formatted files via a web interface. For some reason it decided to run into infinity when call upon my baseCounts() function from within makePretty(). It might be worth noting that both functions are encapsulated by the same parent function.
The function baseCounts() returns valid data in the form of a 100+ long array, console.log confirms that it is not to blame so the problem has to be with makePretty().
Any help is welcome.
function baseCount(records){
// Count instances of Bases in array
var basecounts = Array();
for (i=0; i < records.length; i++){
var record = records[i];
console.log(record);
var count = [record.match(/A/g), record.match(/T/g), record.match(/C/g), record.match(/G/g)];
var basecount = Array();
for (i=0; i < count.length; i++){
basecount.push(count[i].length);
}
// return array of occurance
basecounts.push(basecount);
}
}
function makePretty(fasta){
// Make FASTA more human friendly
var data = Array();
var basecounts = Array();
var bases = Array();
console.log(fasta.length);
// Generate base array
for (i=1; i < fasta.length; i++){
bases.push(fasta[i][2])
}
basecounts = baseCount(bases); // RUNS INTO INFINITY
for (i=0; i < fasta.length; i++){
var record = Array();
record.push(i); // Add protein number
record.push(fasta[i][0]); // Add NC_#
record.push(fasta[i][1]); // Add base index
_record = fasta[i][2];
var l_record = _fasta.length; // Protein length
//var basecount = baseCount(_record);
var cg_content;
}
}
Your nested loops are using the same variable i, and clobbering each other's state.
for (i=0; i < records.length; i++){
...
for (i=0; i < count.length; i++){
...
}
Use distinct variables, say i and j or better yet pick meaningful names.
Also you should declare the variables (var i) to ensure they're local to the function.
Finally, use ++i, not i++. The former means "increment i" while the latter means "i, and oh by the way increment it". They both increment i, but the latter one returns the old value, which is a special language feature to use in special cases.
You're reseting your variable counter in your inner loop (i).
To avoid this, and future problems like it as well as hoisting issues, I would suggest using the newer functions such as forEach or map. You can also clean up your code this way:
function baseCountFunc(records){
// Count instances of Bases in array
var basecount = [];
records.forEach(function(record) {
var count = [record.match(/A/g), record.match(/T/g), record.match(/C/g), record.match(/G/g)];
count.forEach(function(countElement) {
basecount.push(countElement.length);
});
basecounts.push(basecount);
});
}
Also, I noticed you named your function the same name as your variables, you should avoid that as well.
Below code :
loop(n times)
create HTML Button Element
count++;
assign onclick event = function(){
openSomething("Value_"+count)
}
so if i create 3 input elements (n=3) and then go back click any of the three buttons then every time openSomething("Value_"+3) only gets called.
why openSomething("Value_"+1) and openSomething("Value_"+2) does not get called?
I am not sure what is going on may be it the scope issue but i dont know much about scope either, any help to push me in the right direction is much appreciated.
My original code
var count = 0;
for(var i =0;i<someValue;i++){
count++;
var button = document.createElement("img");
button.src = "/images/small_button.gif";
button.imageButton = true;
button.srcBase = "/images/small_button";
button.onclick = function () {
selectSomething("someIdText_"+count);};
cell.appendChild(button);
}
Because JavaScript doesn't have block-level scoping of variables, and as a result everything is scoped to the function. That means that when you have code that uses a variable (like your loop counter n or your count variable) at a later point (i.e. after the full execution of the function), it will have its value set to the last value for the loop. You need to create a closure (a new scope for the variable) inside of your loop. Something like this (since you didn't post your actual code):
for(var i = 0, l = list.length; i < l; i++) {
(function(count) {
something.onclick = function() {
openSomething("Value_" + count);
}
})(i);
}
For a more modern approtce use let,
works for firefox, chrome, and node
if you need to target all the browsers, use Anthony approach
for(var count = 0, l = list.length; count < l; count++) {
let count;
something.onclick = function() {
openSomething("Value_" + count);
}
}
ECMAScript 6's let is supposed to provide block scope without hoisting headaches. Can some explain why in the code below i in the function resolves to the last value from the loop (just like with var) instead of the value from the current iteration?
"use strict";
var things = {};
for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
things["fun" + i] = function() {
console.log(i);
};
}
things["fun0"](); // prints 3
things["fun1"](); // prints 3
things["fun2"](); // prints 3
According to MDN using let in the for loop like that should bind the variable in the scope of the loop's body. Things work as I'd expect them when I use a temporary variable inside the block. Why is that necessary?
"use strict";
var things = {};
for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
let index = i;
things["fun" + i] = function() {
console.log(index);
};
}
things["fun0"](); // prints 0
things["fun1"](); // prints 1
things["fun2"](); // prints 2
I tested the script with Traceur and node --harmony.
squint's answer is no longer up-to-date. In ECMA 6 specification, the specified behaviour is that in
for(let i;;){}
i gets a new binding for every iteration of the loop.
This means that every closure captures a different i instance. So the result of 012 is the correct result as of now. When you run this in Chrome v47+, you get the correct result. When you run it in IE11 and Edge, currently the incorrect result (333) seems to be produced.
More information regarding this bug/feature can be found in the links in this page;
Since when the let expression is used, every iteration creates a new lexical scope chained up to the previous scope. This has performance implications for using the let expression, which is reported here.
I passed this code through Babel so we can understand the behaviour in terms of familiar ES5:
for (let i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
i++;
things["fun" + i] = function() {
console.log(i);
};
i--;
}
Here is the code transpiled to ES5:
var _loop = function _loop(_i) {
_i++;
things["fun" + _i] = function () {
console.log(_i);
};
_i--;
i = _i;
};
for (var i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
_loop(i);
}
We can see that two variables are used.
In the outer scope i is the variable that changes as we iterate.
In the inner scope _i is a unique variable for each iteration. There will eventually be three separate instances of _i.
Each callback function can see its corresponding _i, and could even manipulate it if it wanted to, independently of the _is in other scopes.
(You can confirm that there are three different _is by doing console.log(i++) inside the callback. Changing _i in an earlier callback does not affect the output from later callbacks.)
At the end of each iteration, the value of _i is copied into i. Therefore changing the unique inner variable during the iteration will affect the outer iterated variable.
It is good to see that ES6 has continued the long-standing tradition of WTFJS.
IMHO -- the programmers who first implemented this LET (producing your initial version's results) did it correctly with respect to sanity; they may not have glanced at the spec during that implementation.
It makes more sense that a single variable is being used, but scoped to the for loop. Especially since one should feel free to change that variable depending on conditions within the loop.
But wait -- you can change the loop variable. WTFJS!! However, if you attempt to change it in your inner scope, it won't work now because it is a new variable.
I don't like what I have to do To get what I want (a single variable that is local to the for):
{
let x = 0;
for (; x < length; x++)
{
things["fun" + x] = function() {
console.log(x);
};
}
}
Where as to modify the more intuitive (if imaginary) version to handle a new variable per iteration:
for (let x = 0; x < length; x++)
{
let y = x;
things["fun" + y] = function() {
console.log(y);
};
}
It is crystal clear what my intention with the y variable is.. Or would have been if SANITY ruled the universe.
So your first example now works in FF; it produces the 0, 1, 2. You get to call the issue fixed. I call the issue WTFJS.
ps. My reference to WTFJS is from JoeyTwiddle above; It sounds like a meme I should have known before today, but today was a great time to learn it.