It's a working example. As you can see I'm calling setElemHeight function with a returned value from getElemHeight. But
i think it's a bad practice to pass value instead of function.
Option 1) I can wrap it in anonymous function like this:
function () { getElemHeight('.map-svg') }
Option 2) I can call it inside setElemHeight function and pass parameter there, but i think it would ruin Open Closed Principle.
My question is: What is the right way to pass parameters into callback functions?
Thanks.
function(elem) {
return $(elem).height()
}
function setElemHeight(elem, callback, offset) {
let elemHeight = callback
$(elem).height(elemHeight - offset)
}
$(window).on('load resize', function() {
setElemHeight('#dealersTabContent', getElemHeight('.map-svg'), 190)
})
Passing a value to a function is just fine, unless the height of the element changes over time.
If it changes, you'll want to re-calculate the height on each call of the event handler. If it does not, you can just pass the value in, since it will always use the same value anyway.
Also, this line:
let elemHeight = callback
If callback is a function, this doesn't actually invoke the callback, it just assigns the function to a new variable.
If you want elemHeight to get the return value, you'll need to do this instead:
let elemHeight = callback() // <== Notice the parenthesis
If it's a value, you probably want to change the name.
As for the Open Closed principle, I think that in JS, being a dynamic, weakly typed language, this will probably mostly apply to modules and not a specific code snippet. There are some tricks for creating encapsulation in JS and for allowing extension only in certain places, but generally you can plug anything you want anywhere, so I just don't worry about it.
Related
When dynamically creating an element of type select, there are two problems when setting the onclick method:
It is impossible to simply set the onclick with element.onclick="updateInput(this.articleIndex)";
This results in a final HTML tag where no onclick is shown at all.
When set by e.setAttribute("onclick","updateInput(this.articleIndex)");, it does appear in the final HTML. And the updateInput method does get called.
However the functionality seems to be broken, as the argument always evaluates to undefined
Here a simple example of my problems:
var selectElem = document.createElement("select");
selElem.id="articleSelector_"+this.articleIndex;
console.log("the index of the article is " + this.articleIndex);
selElem.setAttribute("onclick","updateInput(this.articleIndex);");
//selElem.onclick="updateInput(this.articleIndex)"; //this does not work
The log shows the correct number. Inside the updateInput method, the argument is of value undefined instead of the number previously shown in the log.
Try attaching handlers with pure Javascript, and not with HTML, without onclick = "... (which is as bad as eval).
The this in your script refers to the calling context of the function - what is it?
You might want:
element.addEventListener('click', () => {
updateInput(this.articleIndex);
});
(arrow functions retain the this of their surrounding scope)
it is impossible to simply set the onclick with element.onclick="updateInput(this.articleIndex)";
What that code does is it assigns the string "updateInput(this.articleIndex)" to the onclick which makes no sense and certainly not what you want.
Even if you remove the quotes:
element.onclick = updateInput(this.articleIndex);
It is still incorrect because it assigns the result of the updateInput() function to the onclick which is again not what you want.
You need to assign a function name to the onclick like this:
element.onclick = updateInput;
However, this doesn't allow you to pass a parameter as you wish. To do so, you need to use an anonymous function:
element.onclick = function() {
updateInput(this.articleIndex)
};
When set by e.setAttribute("onclick","updateInput(this.articleIndex)");, it does appear in the final HTML. And the updateInput method does get called.
This works because it sets the attribute onclick and it is a string type, so everything is correct. It is equivalent to using the anonymous function above. The only difference is this, which in this case refers to the element itself, while in the above code it depends on the context that the code appears in. That's why in this case the argument always evaluates to undefined because the select element doesn't have an articleIndex property.
The problem is the value of the context this when that element is clicked, the context this is not available anymore at that moment.
You have two ways to solve this problem:
You can use the function addEventListener to bind the event click, and bind the function/handler with the desired context this:
The function bind binds a specific context to a function.
selElem.addEventListener('click', updateInput.bind(this));
function updateInput() {
console.log(this.articleIndex);
}
As you need a specific value, you can use data attributes. That way, you don't need to worry about the context this.
selElem.dataset.articleIndex = this.articleIndex;
selElem.addEventListener('click', function() {
updateInput(this.dataset.articleIndex); // Here you can get that value.
});
What I want:
I have a method which takes an int as as its only parameter, then I'm creating a list where each element will call the other function when clicked, the only thing I want to change is the number that each element passes when clicked.
What I have:
while(++i<e){
(...)
a.addEventListener('click',function(){selectUser(i)},false);
(...)
}
Of course, the obvious problem is that when called, it will always pass the final value of 'i'.
I need that each element passes the value that 'i' had when it was created.
ie; when i=3, I want it to translate into:
a.addEventListener('click',function(){selectUser(3)},false);
I guess it involves some method which returns another method with the actual value, but I'm not really sure how to implement it. I have very little experience with js.
Thanks in advance.
This is a classic problem of closures. You must enclose your event handler inside a closure function which keeps the state of your variable i. Like this...
while(++i<e){
(...)
(function(index){
a.addEventListener('click',function(){selectUser(index)},false);
})(i);
(...)
}
This way every call of the wrapping function will keep your state of the variable i and thereby giving you the right result.
You have to create a new function scope. You could do it the following way (call an anonymous function, which in turn returns a new function with the specified i.
a.addEventListener('click',(function(index) {
return function(){ selectUser(index) };
})(i),false);
This is a follow-up question to a different question I asked not too long ago. Typically, you can access an event in a function call from a jQuery event like this:
$item.live("click", functionToCall);
and in the function:
function functionToCall(ev) {
// do something with ev here, like check 'ev.target'
}
But what if I wanted to send a parameter to functionToCall() and access the event? So something like this, maybe? :
$item.live("click", functionToCall($(this)); // send over parameter this time
and
function functionToCall(ev, $clickedItem) {
// both accessible here?
alert(ev.type);
alert($clickedItem.attr('id'));
}
Would that be acceptable, or is there a different way to send a parameter? Because this way doesn't seem right to me. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks.
CLARIFICATION: I realize that an anonymous callback function would allow me to access both, but for various reasons too lengthy to get into in this post, I need to use a function call rather than the anonymous function. So my question deals strictly with the scenario when an external function needs to be called. Thanks.
UPDATE: My original question presented the scenario of needing to pass $(this) as a parameter to the external function. As it turns out, $(this) will be accessible in the function without even needing to pass it, because of the way jQuery reassigns values to "this" based on events. So performing this code should work for my original question:
$item.live("click", functionToCall);
and
function functionToCall(ev) {
alert(ev.type);
alert($(this).attr('id')); // display id of item that was clicked
}
However, as others have answered, there is a different scenario that involves needing to pass a different kind of variable over as a parameter, such as a simply string or int. In this case, as others have notes, it becomes more complicated. But there do seem to be sufficient answers here to satisfy this second scenario (namely, "currying"). Thanks.
You can curry or partially apply your function:
Something like this:
function functionToCall($clickedItem) {
return function (ev) {
// both accessible here
alert(ev.type);
alert($clickedItem.attr('id'));
}
}
Then you can use it like you want:
$item.live("click", functionToCall($(this));
Note: If you can't modify your original functionToCall because is "external", you can wrap it:
function wrapFunctionToCall($clickedItem) {
return function (ev) {
// call original function:
functionToCall(ev, $clickedItem);
}
}
// ...
$item.live("click", wrapFunctionToCall($(this));
.live('click', functionA(prm) {
return function(ev) {
// here you can use the prm and the event
}
}
I know the question's answered, but for what it's worth, here's a one-liner that works as well if you don't want to edit your original function(s):
$item.live("click", function() { functionToCall( $(this) ); });
The Objective
I want to dynamically assign event handlers to some divs on pages throughout a site.
My Method
Im using jQuery to bind anonymous functions as handlers for selected div events.
The Problem
The code iterates an array of div names and associated urls. The div name is used to set the binding target i.e. attach this event handler to this div event.
While the event handlers are successfully bound to each of the div events, the actions triggered by those event handlers only ever target the last item in the array.
So the idea is that if the user mouses over a given div, it should run a slide-out animation for that div. But instead, mousing over div1 (rangeTabAll) triggers a slide-out animation for div4 (rangeTabThm). The same is true for divs 2, 3, etc. The order is unimportant. Change the array elements around and events will always target the last element in the array, div4.
My Code - (Uses jQuery)
var curTab, curDiv;
var inlineRangeNavUrls=[['rangeTabAll','range_all.html'],['rangeTabRem','range_remedial.html'],
['rangeTabGym','range_gym.html'],['rangeTabThm','range_thermal.html']];
for (var i=0;i<inlineRangeNavUrls.length;i++)
{
curTab=(inlineRangeNavUrls[i][0]).toString();
curDiv='#' + curTab;
if ($(curDiv).length)
{
$(curDiv).bind("mouseover", function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, true);} );
$(curDiv).bind("mouseout", function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, false);} );
}
}
My Theory
I'm either not seeing a blindingly obvious syntax error or its a pass by reference problem.
Initially i had the following statement to set the value of curTab:
curTab=inlineRangeNavUrls[i][0];
So when the problem occured i figured that as i changed (via for loop iteration) the reference to curTab, i was in fact changing the reference for all previous anonymous function event handlers to the new curTab value as well.... which is why event handlers always targeted the last div.
So what i really needed to do was pass the curTab value to the anonymous function event handlers not the curTab object reference.
So i thought:
curTab=(inlineRangeNavUrls[i][0]).toString();
would fix the problem, but it doesn't. Same deal. So clearly im missing some key, and probably very basic, knowledge regarding the problem. Thanks.
You need to create a new variable on each pass through the loop, so that it'll get captured in the closures you're creating for the event handlers.
However, merely moving the variable declaration into the loop won't accomplish this, because JavaScript doesn't introduce a new scope for arbitrary blocks.
One easy way to force the introduction of a new scope is to use another anonymous function:
for (var i=0;i<inlineRangeNavUrls.length;i++)
{
curDiv='#' + inlineRangeNavUrls[i][1];
if ($(curDiv).length)
{
(function(curTab)
{
$(curDiv).bind("mouseover", function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, true);} );
$(curDiv).bind("mouseout", function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, false);} );
})(inlineRangeNavUrls[i][0]); // pass as argument to anonymous function - this will introduce a new scope
}
}
As Jason suggests, you can actually clean this up quite a bit using jQuery's built-in hover() function:
for (var i=0;i<inlineRangeNavUrls.length;i++)
{
(function(curTab) // introduce a new scope
{
$('#' + inlineRangeNavUrls[i][1])
.hover(
function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, true);},
function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, false);}
);
// establish per-loop variable by passsing as argument to anonymous function
})(inlineRangeNavUrls[i][0]);
}
what's going on here is that your anonmymous functions are forming a closure, and taking their outer scope with them. That means that when you reference curTab inside your anomymous function, when the event handler runs that function, it's going to look up the current value of curTab in your outer scope. That will be whatever you last assigned to curTab. (not what was assigned at the time you binded the function)
what you need to do is change this:
$(curDiv).bind("mouseover", function(){showHideRangeSlidingTabs(curTab, true);} );
to this:
$(curDiv).bind("mouseover",
(function (mylocalvariable) {
return function(){
showHideRangeSlidingTabs(mylocalvariable, true);
}
})(curTab)
);
this will copy the value of curTab into the scope of the outer function, which the inner function will take with it. This copying happens at the same time that you're binding the inner function to the event handler, so "mylocalvariable" reflects the value of curTab at that time. Then next time around the loop, a new outer function, with a new scope will be created, and the next value of curTab copied into it.
shog9's answer accomplishes basically the same thing, but his code is a little more austere.
it's kinda complicated, but it makes sense if you think about it. Closures are weird.
edit: oops, forgot to return the inner function. Fixed.
I think you're making this more complicated than it needs to be. If all you're doing is assigning a sliding effect on mouseover/out then try the hover effect with jquery.
$("#mytab").hover(function(){
$(this).next("div").slideDown("fast");},
function(){
$(this).next("div").slideUp("fast");
});
If you posted your full HTML I could tell you exactly how to do it :)
You can put your variable's value into a non existing tag, and later you can read them from there. This snippet is part of a loop body:
s = introduction.introductions[page * 6 + i][0]; //The variables content
$('#intro_img_'+i).attr('tag' , s); //Store them in a tag named tag
$('#intro_img_'+i).click( function() {introduction.selectTemplate(this, $(this).attr('tag'));} ); //retrieve the stored data
I'm generating an unordered list through javascript (using jQuery). Each listitem must receive its own event listener for the 'click'-event. However, I'm having trouble getting the right callback attached to the right item. A (stripped) code sample might clear things up a bit:
for(class_id in classes) {
callback = function() { this.selectClass(class_id) };
li_item = jQuery('<li></li>')
.click(callback);
}
Actually, more is going on in this iteration, but I didn't think it was very relevant to the question. In any case, what's happening is that the callback function seems to be referenced rather than stored (& copied). End result? When a user clicks any of the list items, it will always execute the action for the last class_id in the classes array, as it uses the function stored in callback at that specific point.
I found dirty workarounds (such as parsing the href attribute in an enclosed a element), but I was wondering whether there is a way to achieve my goals in a 'clean' way. If my approach is horrifying, please say so, as long as you tell me why :-) Thanks!
This is a classic "you need a closure" problem. Here's how it usually plays out.
Iterate over some values
Define/assign a function in that iteration that uses iterated variables
You learn that every function uses only values from the last iteration.
WTF?
Again, when you see this pattern, it should immediately make you think "closure"
Extending your example, here's how you'd put in a closure
for ( class_id in classes )
{
callback = function( cid )
{
return function()
{
$(this).selectClass( cid );
}
}( class_id );
li_item = jQuery('<li></li>').click(callback);
}
However, in this specific instance of jQuery, you shouldn't need a closure - but I have to ask about the nature of your variable classes - is that an object? Because you iterate over with a for-in loop, which suggest object. And for me it begs the question, why aren't you storing this in an array? Because if you were, your code could just be this.
jQuery('<li></li>').click(function()
{
$(this).addClass( classes.join( ' ' ) );
});
Your code:
for(class_id in classes) {
callback = function() { this.selectClass(class_id) };
li_item = jQuery('<li></li>')
.click(callback);
}
This is mostly ok, just one problem. The variable callback is global; so every time you loop, you are overwriting it. Put the var keyword in front of it to scope it locally and you should be fine.
EDIT for comments: It might not be global as you say, but it's outside the scope of the for-loop. So the variable is the same reference each time round the loop. Putting var in the loop scopes it to the loop, making a new reference each time.
This is a better cleaner way of doing what you want.
Add the class_id info onto the element using .data().
Then use .live() to add a click handler to all the new elements, this avoids having x * click functions.
for(class_id in classes) {
li_item = jQuery('<li></li>').data('class_id', class_id).addClass('someClass');
}
//setup click handler on new li's
$('li.someClass').live('click', myFunction )
function myFunction(){
//get class_id
var classId = $(this).data('class_id');
//do something
}
My javascript fu is pretty weak but as I understand it closures reference local variables on the stack (and that stack frame is passed around with the function, again, very sketchy). Your example indeed doesn't work because each function keeps a reference to the same variable. Try instead creating a different function that creates the closure i.e.:
function createClosure(class_id) {
callback = function() { this.selectClass(class_id) };
return callback;
}
and then:
for(class_id in classes) {
callback = createClosure(class_id);
li_item = jQuery('<li></li>').click(callback);
}
It's a bit of a kludge of course, there's probably better ways.
why can't you generate them all and then call something like
$(".li_class").click(function(){ this.whatever() };
EDIT:
If you need to add more classes, just create a string in your loop with all the class names and use that as your selector.
$(".li_class1, .li_class2, etc").click(function(){ this.whatever() };
Or you can attach the class_id to the .data() of those list items.
$("<li />").data("class_id", class_id).click(function(){
alert("This item has class_id "+$(this).data("class_id"));
});
Be careful, though: You're creating the callback function anew for every $("<li />") call. I'm not sure about JavaScript implementation details, but this might be memory expensive.
Instead, you could do
function listItemCallback(){
alert("This item has class_id "+$(this).data("class_id"));
}
$("<li />").data("class_id", class_id).click(listItemCallback);