We Keep Coding

how to cleanly use JS variables in an onclick function that are set in the page load function

I have a functionality that I had running in the
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
var variable_name_1 = localStorage.getItem('var_1');
...
}
and I would like to move the functionality such that it only runs when the user clicks a button, in here:
function maketempuser() {
...
}
I can get the function to call when I want. But the function utilizes tons of variables from the load function. Is there a clean way to "globalize" these variables? Or must I find some way to add all these variables in the html:
<button ... onclick='maketempuser(variable_name_1, variable_name_2, ...);' >
NOTE: the javascript will run the same file, I just don't want it to keep re-running every time the user reloads the page since there is an ajax mysql insert that occurs because this page is one in a line of pages that enables a user to register.

To not pollute the global scope with a lot of variables (which can be overridden by other apps), I recommend you create an object with an app specific name, maybe something like this
var myAppVar = {};
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
myAppVar.var_1 = localStorage.getItem('var_1');
...
}

Just define them in global scope:
var variable_name_1;
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
variable_name_1 = localStorage.getItem('var_1');
...
}
This, however, is not a particularly healthy technique, since it's prone to name collisions. Best thing to do is have a custom object (cO, or with your initials, something unlikely to be used by anything else) and use it as a placeholder for all your custom vars:
var cS = {
var_1:null // or some default value...
};
window.addEventListener('load', function() {
cS.var_1 = localStorage.getItem('var_1');
...
}

Since localStorage is already global just retrieve the values you need in your handler from there.
function maketempuser() {
var variable_name_1 = localStorage.getItem('var_1');
}
No need to add anything extra to the global scope at all.

Razor Syntax in External Javascript

So as you might know, Razor Syntax in ASP.NET MVC does not work in external JavaScript files.
My current solution is to put the Razor Syntax in a a global variable and set the value of that variable from the mvc view that is making use of that .js file.
JavaScript file:
function myFunc() {
alert(myValue);
}
MVC View file:
<script language="text/javascript">
myValue = #myValueFromModel;
</script>
I want to know how I can pass myValue directly as a parameter to the function ? I prefer to have explicit calling with param than relying on globals, however I'm not so keen on javascript.
How would I implement this with javascript parameters? Thanks!

Just have your function accept an argument and use that in the alert (or wherever).
external.js
function myFunc(value) {
alert(value);
}
someview.cshtml
<script>
myFunc(#myValueFromModel);
</script>
One thing to keep in mind though, is that if myValueFromModel is a string then it is going to come through as myFunc(hello) so you need to wrap that in quotes so it becomes myFunc('hello') like this
myFunc('#(myValueFromModel)');
Note the extra () used with razor. This helps the engine distinguish where the break between the razor code is so nothing odd happens. It can be useful when there are nested ( or " around.
edit
If this is going to be done multiple times, then some changes may need to take place in the JavaScript end of things. Mainly that the shown example doesn't properly depict the scenario. It will need to be modified. You may want to use a simple structure like this.
jsFiddle Demo
external.js
var myFunc= new function(){
var func = this,
myFunc = function(){
alert(func.value);
};
myFunc.set = function(value){
func.value = value;
}
return myFunc;
};
someview.cshtml
<script>
myFunc.set('#(myValueFromModel)');
myFunc();//can be called repeatedly now
</script>

I often find that JavaScript in the browser is typically conceptually tied to a specific element. If that's the case for you, you may want to associate the value with that element in your Razor code, and then use JavaScript to extract that value and use it in some way.
For example:
<div class="my-class" data-func-arg="#myValueFromModel"></div>
Static JavaScript:
$(function() {
$('.my-class').click(function() {
var arg = $(this).data('func-arg');
myFunc(arg);
});
});

Do you want to execute your function immediately? Or want to call the funcion with the parameter?
You could add a wrapper function with no parameter and inside call your function with the global var as a parameter. And when you need to call myFunc() you call it trough myFuncWrapper();
function myFuncWrapper(){
myFunc(myValue);
}
function myFunc(myParam){
//function code here;
}

How to wrap loose variables and functions within a JavaScript object

I try to submit a simple Firefox add-on and got a message from AMO editor about wrapping of variables and functions within a JavaScript object in order to prevent conflicts with other add-ons that may be installed by users. The working code is very simple and looks:
function analyze() {
var uri = document.getElementById('urlbar').value;
var requrl="http://www.myanalyzingsiteaddress.com/" + (uri);
gBrowser.selectedTab = gBrowser.addTab(requrl);
}
Is it enough to make other var names to avoid eventual conflicts or could you point me to other code change, which would fulfill the AMO editor's instruction?
Thank you in advance!
Evgenij

You should have been pointed to Javascript Object Management from the XUL School tutorial.
analyze is a generic name. In an overlay there is only one scope/namespace which is shared by the browser code itself and any additional extension code. It is therefore possible that either the browser or another add-on uses analyze as well and boom.
You need to avoid that by making names a specifc as possible. E.g.
function my_addon_id_analyze() ...
Use an an object with a (pseudo) unique name.
if (!("org" in this)) {
this.org = {};
}
if (!("example" in org)) {
org.example = {};
}
org.example.addonid = {
analyze: function() ...
};
// call
org.example.addonid.analyze();
Or even "hide" your code in an anonymous function. This is then hidden from the DOM as well, so no more <button id="example.org.addonid.mybutton" onclick="analyze()"> event handling. But you can always use addEventListener.
(function() {
"use strict";
function analyze() ...
// wire up an event handler instead of onlick
document.getElementById("example.org.addonid.mybutton").addEventListener("click", analyze);
})();
Mix some/all of the above, as long as you avoid short/generic names:
if (!("org" in this)) {
this.org = {};
}
if (!("example" in org)) {
org.example = {};
}
org.example.addonid = (function() {
function analyze() ...
function notvisibleoutside() ...
// return object of "exported"/"visible" functions.
return {
analyze: analyze
};
})();
// call
org.example.addonid.analyze()
Also, keep in mind that missing var (or let/const) declarations will implicitly declare the variable in the global scope.
E.g.:
function abc() {
for (i = 0; i < 10; ++i) doSomething();
}
Will implicitly declare a variable named i in the global scope (in a XUL window the global scope is window, therefore this will create window.i). Implicit declarations may therefore not only cause conflicts but also create quasi memory leaks, e.g.
function call_me_to_leak_1MB() {
hugeArray = new ArrayBuffer(1<<20);
}
will declare window.hugeArray that lives as long as the browser window is open instead of using a local variable that gets garbage collected as soon as the variables goes out of scope (and there are no more other references, of course).
Using strict mode makes implicit declaration an error, which is helpful to catch and avoid such mistakes early.
So much for the Javascript part. There is still other stuff that might clash.
DOM Ids: Use unique <button id="example.org.addonid.mybutton">, or more CSS friendly <button id="example-org-addonid-mybutton"> (or at the very least something like addonid-mybutton) instead of <button id="mybutton">
CSS: Never style random elements.
No: button { color: green; }
Yep: #example-org-addonid-mybutton { color: green; }
chrome.manifest:
No: content generic content/
Yep: content example-org-addonid content/.

Function (..) throws 'eval is evil' message

I'm not using eval, and I'm not sure what the problem is that Crockford has with the following. Is there a better approach to solve the following problem or is this just something I need to ignore (I prefer to perfect/improve my solutions if there is areas for improvement).
I'm using some pixel tracking stuff and in this case a client has bound a JS function to the onclick property of an HTML image tag which redirects off the site. I need to track the clicks reliably without running into race conditions with multiples of event listeners on the image. The strategy is to override the event at run time, copying and running it in my own function. Note this is being applied to a site I do not control and cannot change. So the solution looks something like:
...
func = Function(img.attr('onclick'));
...
img.attr('onclick', '');
... //some custom tracking code
func.call(this);
and the JSLint checker throws the eval is evil error.
Is there a better way to avoid race conditions for multiple events around href actions?

You're implicitly using eval because you're asking for the callback function as it was specified as an attribute in the HTML as a string and then constructing a Function with it.
Just use the img.onclick property instead, and you will directly obtain the function that the browser built from the attribute that you can then .call:
var func = img.onclick; // access already compiled function
img.onclick = null; // property change updates the attribute too
... // some custom tracking code
func.call(img, ev); // call the original function
or better yet:
(function(el) {
var old = el.onclick;
el.onclick = function() {
// do my stuff
..
// invoke the old handler with the same parameters
old.apply(this, arguments);
}
})(img);
The advantage of this latter method are two fold:
it creates no new global variables - everything is hidden inside the anonymous closure
It ensures that the original handler is called with the exact same parameters as are supplied to your replacement function

var oldClick = myImg.onclick;
myImg.onclick = function(evt){
// Put you own code here
return oldClick.call( this, evt );
};

javascript: anonymous function expose functions (how frameworks really works)

i was exploring in the last few days how big frameworks works , how they assign their function name and it can't(?) be override , i pretty much know how framework work with anonymous function , for example they do it this way or similar version :
(function(){
var Sizzle = function (){
var x;
};
Sizzle.f = function(){
alert("!");
};
window.Sizzle = Sizzle;
})();
i still don't get few things about those huge frameworks and i hope i can find answer :
how do they assign function name and the name can't be override?
in the code above to call the function i need to write Sizzle.f() to get the function to work , but when i use jquery i don't write Jquery.show() , just show() , how do they vanish the "jquery" from "jquery.show()" function call?
by saying the name can't be override i mean , if i create function with one of the jquery functions names , the jquery function will work.
thanks in advance.

As has been shown for #2, it's really easy for BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff to be added to anything you want.
var _ = BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff;
_(); // runs BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff;
As for #1:
Most libraries DO let their functions be overwritten.
It's the values that are inside of the framework's closure which are preserved, for safety reasons.
So you could do something like:
BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff = function StealEverything() {};
(BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff === StealEverything) // true;
But doStuff would have NO access to any of the variables hidden inside of the framework's closure.
It would also mean that until the page was reloaded, doStuff would also not work the way you want it to.
HOWEVER, in newer versions of JavaScript (ECMA5-compatible browsers), it WILL be possible to do something like what you're suggesting.
BIG_NAMESPACE = (function () {
var do_stuff = function () { console.log("doin' stuff"); },
functions = {
set doStuff (overwrite) { }
get doStuff () { return do_stuff; }
};
return { Functions : functions };
}());
Then, this will work:
BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff(); // "doin' stuff"
BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff = function () { console.log("ain't doin' jack"); };
BIG_NAMESPACE.Functions.doStuff(); // "doin' stuff"
However, Frameworks aren't going to use this for a LONG time.
This is not even remotely backwards compatible. Maybe in 2016...
There were defineGetter and defineSetter methods as well, but they aren't a formal part of the JavaScript language. Like innerHTML, they're things that the browser vendors put in, to make life better... ...as such, there's no real guarantee that they're going to be in any/all browsers your users have. Plus, they're deprecated, now that new browsers use the get and set constructs that other languages have.

(function(){
var jqueree = {};
jqueree.someval = 22;
jqueree.somefunc = function(){ alert(this.someval); };
window.jqueree = jqueree;
window.somefunc = function(){ jqueree.somefunc.call(jqueree); };
window.$$$ = jqueree;
})();
// all equivalent
window.somefunc();
window.jqueree.somefunc();
$$$.somefunc();
somefunc();

Answering your Questions
At the top of jQuery you'll see: var jQuery = (function() {, which creates the local function (its incomplete; the }); occurs elsewhere).
At the very end of jQuery you'll notice the following, which is how it attaches it to the global namespace:
// Expose jQuery to the global object
window.jQuery = window.$ = jQuery;
I have never seen a jQuery function called without referencing the jQuery object. I think you always need to use jQuery.show() or $.show(); however maybe you're saying you don't have to call window.jQuery.show(), which you are permitted to drop the window, since that is the default.
Using your example
(function(){
/* This is where Sizzle is defined locally, but not exposed globally */
var Sizzle = function (){
var x;
};
/* If you put "window.f = Sizzle.f = function(){" then you could *
* call f() w/o typing Sizzle.f() */
Sizzle.f = function(){
alert("!");
};
/* The following line is what makes it so you can use Sizzle elsewhere *
* on your page (it exposes it globally here) */
window.Sizzle = Sizzle;
})();

use function _name_() {} and the name is static
the simply use var $ = jQuery; to create an alias.

jQuery works this way:
Supposed you have this jQuery code:
$("#title").show();
You have three elements to that line.
$ is a javascript function
"#title" is an argument to that function
.show() is a method call
Here's how it works.
Javascript executes the function named $ and passed it an argument of "#title".
That function does it's business, finds the #title object in the DOM, creates a jQuery object, puts that DOM element into the array in the jQuery object and returns the jQuery object.
The Javascript execution engine then takes the return value from that function call (which is now a jQuery object) and looks for and executes the .show() method on that object.
The .show() method then looks at the array of DOM elements in the jQuery object and does the show operation for each DOM element.
In answer to your question, there is no .show() all by itself. It's a method on a jQuery object and, in this example, that jQuery object is returned from the $("#title") function call.