I would like to know if there is a difference between those 2 differents way of using onload() function ? (time delay, order of execution etc.) or is it exactly the same ?
Thanks
1st way :
<iframe onload="frameload()" src="script.php" name="myFrame" id="myFrame"></iframe>
<script>
function frameload(){
var iframe = document.getElementById('myFrame');
var innerDoc = iframe.contentWindow.document;
document.write(innerDoc.getElementById('ele1').value);
}
</script>
2nd way:
<iframe src="script.php" name="myFrame" id="myFrame"></iframe>
<script>
document.getElementById('myFrame').onload=function() {
var iframe = document.getElementById('myFrame');
var innerDoc = iframe.contentWindow.document;
document.write(innerDoc.getElementById('ele1').value);
}
</script>
In this particular example the effect is the same.
Anyway, if you'd need to use this inside your function, in the first case this refers to the Window object, while in the second one it refers to the iframe DOM node.
Additionally, as other pointed out, inline JS code is bad for several reasons. In a nutshell, it's preferable to separate the JS from HTML to improve readability and caching (e.g. if the code is in a separate file).
I guess there is no significant performance difference, however the 2nd approach helps you separate the concerns - markup (HTML) and functionality (JS).
Those 2 should be identical.
It's nicer to add it via
.addEventListener("load", yourFunction);
If that's not possible in your case your code should work fine.
I agree with #Lorenzo's answer and I would like to add that the second approach is a bit faster. Here are the results from firefox, please check the links I used a random link as a source for iframe:
First approach: http://screencast.com/t/esXo0jC4Qcx
Second approach: http://screencast.com/t/BlLmXcPtuZW
ofcorz both are same.
standard coding style is the second one.
But some times we have to follow the first approach.
eg. if we have a textBox with same id "txtStudentName" in Create and Edit pages and have to autocomplete it only on create page. In such condition you can use first approach to autocomplete. Othewise the code will affect both textboxes by using a single js
Related
In tutorials I've learnt to use document.write. Now I understand that by many this is frowned upon. I've tried print(), but then it literally sends it to the printer.
So what are alternatives I should use, and why shouldn't I use document.write? Both w3schools and MDN use document.write.
The reason that your HTML is replaced is because of an evil JavaScript function: document.write().
It is most definitely "bad form." It only works with webpages if you use it on the page load; and if you use it during runtime, it will replace your entire document with the input. And if you're applying it as strict XHTML structure it's not even valid code.
the problem:
document.write writes to the document stream. Calling document.write on a closed (or loaded) document automatically calls document.open which will clear the document.
-- quote from the MDN
document.write() has two henchmen, document.open(), and document.close(). When the HTML document is loading, the document is "open". When the document has finished loading, the document has "closed". Using document.write() at this point will erase your entire (closed) HTML document and replace it with a new (open) document. This means your webpage has erased itself and started writing a new page - from scratch.
I believe document.write() causes the browser to have a performance decrease as well (correct me if I am wrong).
an example:
This example writes output to the HTML document after the page has loaded. Watch document.write()'s evil powers clear the entire document when you press the "exterminate" button:
I am an ordinary HTML page. I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes. Please do not <input type="button" onclick="document.write('This HTML page has been succesfully exterminated.')" value="exterminate"/>
me!
the alternatives:
.innerHTML This is a wonderful alternative, but this attribute has to be attached to the element where you want to put the text.
Example: document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'Some text!';
.createTextNode() is the alternative recommended by the W3C.
Example: var para = document.createElement('p');
para.appendChild(document.createTextNode('Hello, '));
NOTE: This is known to have some performance decreases (slower than .innerHTML). I recommend using .innerHTML instead.
the example with the .innerHTML alternative:
I am an ordinary HTML page.
I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes.
Please do not
<input type="button" onclick="document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'There was an error exterminating this page. Please replace <code>.innerHTML</code> with <code>document.write()</code> to complete extermination.';" value="exterminate"/>
me!
<p id="output1"></p>
Here is code that should replace document.write in-place:
document.write=function(s){
var scripts = document.getElementsByTagName('script');
var lastScript = scripts[scripts.length-1];
lastScript.insertAdjacentHTML("beforebegin", s);
}
You can combine insertAdjacentHTML method and document.currentScript property.
The insertAdjacentHTML() method of the Element interface parses the specified text as HTML or XML and inserts the resulting nodes into the DOM tree at a specified position:
'beforebegin': Before the element itself.
'afterbegin': Just inside the element, before its first child.
'beforeend': Just inside the element, after its last child.
'afterend': After the element itself.
The document.currentScript property returns the <script> element whose script is currently being processed. Best position will be beforebegin — new HTML will be inserted before <script> itself. To match document.write's native behavior, one would position the text afterend, but then the nodes from consecutive calls to the function aren't placed in the same order as you called them (like document.write does), but in reverse. The order in which your HTML appears is probably more important than where they're place relative to the <script> tag, hence the use of beforebegin.
document.currentScript.insertAdjacentHTML(
'beforebegin',
'This is a document.write alternative'
)
As a recommended alternative to document.write you could use DOM manipulation to directly query and add node elements to the DOM.
Just dropping a note here to say that, although using document.write is highly frowned upon due to performance concerns (synchronous DOM injection and evaluation), there is also no actual 1:1 alternative if you are using document.write to inject script tags on demand.
There are a lot of great ways to avoid having to do this (e.g. script loaders like RequireJS that manage your dependency chains) but they are more invasive and so are best used throughout the site/application.
I fail to see the problem with document.write. If you are using it before the onload event fires, as you presumably are, to build elements from structured data for instance, it is the appropriate tool to use. There is no performance advantage to using insertAdjacentHTML or explicitly adding nodes to the DOM after it has been built. I just tested it three different ways with an old script I once used to schedule incoming modem calls for a 24/7 service on a bank of 4 modems.
By the time it is finished this script creates over 3000 DOM nodes, mostly table cells. On a 7 year old PC running Firefox on Vista, this little exercise takes less than 2 seconds using document.write from a local 12kb source file and three 1px GIFs which are re-used about 2000 times. The page just pops into existence fully formed, ready to handle events.
Using insertAdjacentHTML is not a direct substitute as the browser closes tags which the script requires remain open, and takes twice as long to ultimately create a mangled page. Writing all the pieces to a string and then passing it to insertAdjacentHTML takes even longer, but at least you get the page as designed. Other options (like manually re-building the DOM one node at a time) are so ridiculous that I'm not even going there.
Sometimes document.write is the thing to use. The fact that it is one of the oldest methods in JavaScript is not a point against it, but a point in its favor - it is highly optimized code which does exactly what it was intended to do and has been doing since its inception.
It's nice to know that there are alternative post-load methods available, but it must be understood that these are intended for a different purpose entirely; namely modifying the DOM after it has been created and memory allocated to it. It is inherently more resource-intensive to use these methods if your script is intended to write the HTML from which the browser creates the DOM in the first place.
Just write it and let the browser and interpreter do the work. That's what they are there for.
PS: I just tested using an onload param in the body tag and even at this point the document is still open and document.write() functions as intended. Also, there is no perceivable performance difference between the various methods in the latest version of Firefox. Of course there is a ton of caching probably going on somewhere in the hardware/software stack, but that's the point really - let the machine do the work. It may make a difference on a cheap smartphone though. Cheers!
The question depends on what you are actually trying to do.
Usually, instead of doing document.write you can use someElement.innerHTML or better, document.createElement with an someElement.appendChild.
You can also consider using a library like jQuery and using the modification functions in there: http://api.jquery.com/category/manipulation/
This is probably the most correct, direct replacement: insertAdjacentHTML.
Try to use getElementById() or getElementsByName() to access a specific element and then to use innerHTML property:
<html>
<body>
<div id="myDiv1"></div>
<div id="myDiv2"></div>
</body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var myDiv1 = document.getElementById("myDiv1");
var myDiv2 = document.getElementById("myDiv2");
myDiv1.innerHTML = "<b>Content of 1st DIV</b>";
myDiv2.innerHTML = "<i>Content of second DIV element</i>";
</script>
</html>
Use
var documentwrite =(value, method="", display="")=>{
switch(display) {
case "block":
var x = document.createElement("p");
break;
case "inline":
var x = document.createElement("span");
break;
default:
var x = document.createElement("p");
}
var t = document.createTextNode(value);
x.appendChild(t);
if(method==""){
document.body.appendChild(x);
}
else{
document.querySelector(method).appendChild(x);
}
}
and call the function based on your requirement as below
documentwrite("My sample text"); //print value inside body
documentwrite("My sample text inside id", "#demoid", "block"); // print value inside id and display block
documentwrite("My sample text inside class", ".democlass","inline"); // print value inside class and and display inline
I'm not sure if this will work exactly, but I thought of
var docwrite = function(doc) {
document.write(doc);
};
This solved the problem with the error messages for me.
I would like to pass a variable declared between <script> TAGs to the URL in a iframe TAG, like this:
<script>
var1 = 1;
</script>
<iframe src="http://link_to_site?param=var1>
But this does not work. Is it possible to do it and how should i do ?
Thanks
First you would need a way to identify the target element in your JavaScript code. For example, give the element an id attribute:
<iframe id="myIframe" />
(There are certainly other ways to identify an element. Fairly complex queries can be constructed to identify specific elements throughout the DOM. But an id is a particularly straightforward approach at least for this example.)
Then in your JavaScript code you'd get a reference to that element and set its src property:
var var1 = 1;
document.getElementById('myIframe').src = 'http://link_to_site?param=' + var1;
One thing to note is that this code would need to execute after that element exists on the page. If it runs above that element on the page then that element won't yet exist and getElementById() would return nothing.
"After" could mean that it runs immediately but exists "lower" on the page than the element. Or it could mean that the code is placed anywhere on the page but doesn't actually execute until a later time, such as in an event handler.
*FYI- Sorry, but the accepted answer doesn't actually work. Read below. *
I suggest that you use the jQuery JS library to assist in your task. It normalizes the JS environment so you don't have to worry about what browser your user is using.
It also makes it easier to do some simple tasks like getting specific elements etc.
Here is code that shows how to dynamically create an iFrame AFTER the page has finished loading. This is important because JS runs synchronously: in other words, if you write JS for a specific element, but that element doesn't yet exist on the page, the JS will fail.
By wrapping your code in:
$(document).ready(function(){})
you ensure that the page will finishing loading BEFORE your JS executes.
<script type="text/javascript" src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-2.2.0.min.js"></script>
<body>
</body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var1 = 1;
$(document).ready(function(){
var theiFrame = '<iframe src="http://link_to_site?param=' + var1 + '">';
$('body').append(theiFrame);
})
</script>
iFrames are a little weird in that they mess with the "onload" event of the document. That's another reason to dynamically add your iFrame to the DOM instead of adding it as an HTML tag. Read this article for more info:
http://www.aaronpeters.nl/blog/iframe-loading-techniques-performance
I'm trying to write jQuery code to count the number of <img> elements contained on a site. The site is comprised of 4 separate HTML pages, all in the same folder on the server. Only one of these pages, "pics.html", loads the .js file that needs to perform this function (pics.html is the only page that needs to know how many images are on the site).
It's easy to get the <img> elements from pics.html, since pics.html is the page that loads the script:
var numImgs = $('img').length;
...but I'm confused as to how I would perform this same function in reference to a different page. Is it possible to specify the HTML page that the selector refers to?
I tried this, as a wild guess:
var numImgs = $('test.html:img').length;
Unsurprisingly, it didn't work. I googled for the answer, but couldn't find a solution - or if I did find one, I suppose I didn't understand it well enough to realize that it was the answer.
Thanks for any help you can offer!
To select an object from an external file, you'll need to use $.load().
Reference: http://api.jquery.com/load/
Try this
$(document).ready(function(){
$('#myDiv').load('/remotePage.html #TargetDiv', function () {
var elements = $('.class', this).length;
alert(elements);
});
});
In tutorials I've learnt to use document.write. Now I understand that by many this is frowned upon. I've tried print(), but then it literally sends it to the printer.
So what are alternatives I should use, and why shouldn't I use document.write? Both w3schools and MDN use document.write.
The reason that your HTML is replaced is because of an evil JavaScript function: document.write().
It is most definitely "bad form." It only works with webpages if you use it on the page load; and if you use it during runtime, it will replace your entire document with the input. And if you're applying it as strict XHTML structure it's not even valid code.
the problem:
document.write writes to the document stream. Calling document.write on a closed (or loaded) document automatically calls document.open which will clear the document.
-- quote from the MDN
document.write() has two henchmen, document.open(), and document.close(). When the HTML document is loading, the document is "open". When the document has finished loading, the document has "closed". Using document.write() at this point will erase your entire (closed) HTML document and replace it with a new (open) document. This means your webpage has erased itself and started writing a new page - from scratch.
I believe document.write() causes the browser to have a performance decrease as well (correct me if I am wrong).
an example:
This example writes output to the HTML document after the page has loaded. Watch document.write()'s evil powers clear the entire document when you press the "exterminate" button:
I am an ordinary HTML page. I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes. Please do not <input type="button" onclick="document.write('This HTML page has been succesfully exterminated.')" value="exterminate"/>
me!
the alternatives:
.innerHTML This is a wonderful alternative, but this attribute has to be attached to the element where you want to put the text.
Example: document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'Some text!';
.createTextNode() is the alternative recommended by the W3C.
Example: var para = document.createElement('p');
para.appendChild(document.createTextNode('Hello, '));
NOTE: This is known to have some performance decreases (slower than .innerHTML). I recommend using .innerHTML instead.
the example with the .innerHTML alternative:
I am an ordinary HTML page.
I am innocent, and purely for informational purposes.
Please do not
<input type="button" onclick="document.getElementById('output1').innerHTML = 'There was an error exterminating this page. Please replace <code>.innerHTML</code> with <code>document.write()</code> to complete extermination.';" value="exterminate"/>
me!
<p id="output1"></p>
Here is code that should replace document.write in-place:
document.write=function(s){
var scripts = document.getElementsByTagName('script');
var lastScript = scripts[scripts.length-1];
lastScript.insertAdjacentHTML("beforebegin", s);
}
You can combine insertAdjacentHTML method and document.currentScript property.
The insertAdjacentHTML() method of the Element interface parses the specified text as HTML or XML and inserts the resulting nodes into the DOM tree at a specified position:
'beforebegin': Before the element itself.
'afterbegin': Just inside the element, before its first child.
'beforeend': Just inside the element, after its last child.
'afterend': After the element itself.
The document.currentScript property returns the <script> element whose script is currently being processed. Best position will be beforebegin — new HTML will be inserted before <script> itself. To match document.write's native behavior, one would position the text afterend, but then the nodes from consecutive calls to the function aren't placed in the same order as you called them (like document.write does), but in reverse. The order in which your HTML appears is probably more important than where they're place relative to the <script> tag, hence the use of beforebegin.
document.currentScript.insertAdjacentHTML(
'beforebegin',
'This is a document.write alternative'
)
As a recommended alternative to document.write you could use DOM manipulation to directly query and add node elements to the DOM.
Just dropping a note here to say that, although using document.write is highly frowned upon due to performance concerns (synchronous DOM injection and evaluation), there is also no actual 1:1 alternative if you are using document.write to inject script tags on demand.
There are a lot of great ways to avoid having to do this (e.g. script loaders like RequireJS that manage your dependency chains) but they are more invasive and so are best used throughout the site/application.
I fail to see the problem with document.write. If you are using it before the onload event fires, as you presumably are, to build elements from structured data for instance, it is the appropriate tool to use. There is no performance advantage to using insertAdjacentHTML or explicitly adding nodes to the DOM after it has been built. I just tested it three different ways with an old script I once used to schedule incoming modem calls for a 24/7 service on a bank of 4 modems.
By the time it is finished this script creates over 3000 DOM nodes, mostly table cells. On a 7 year old PC running Firefox on Vista, this little exercise takes less than 2 seconds using document.write from a local 12kb source file and three 1px GIFs which are re-used about 2000 times. The page just pops into existence fully formed, ready to handle events.
Using insertAdjacentHTML is not a direct substitute as the browser closes tags which the script requires remain open, and takes twice as long to ultimately create a mangled page. Writing all the pieces to a string and then passing it to insertAdjacentHTML takes even longer, but at least you get the page as designed. Other options (like manually re-building the DOM one node at a time) are so ridiculous that I'm not even going there.
Sometimes document.write is the thing to use. The fact that it is one of the oldest methods in JavaScript is not a point against it, but a point in its favor - it is highly optimized code which does exactly what it was intended to do and has been doing since its inception.
It's nice to know that there are alternative post-load methods available, but it must be understood that these are intended for a different purpose entirely; namely modifying the DOM after it has been created and memory allocated to it. It is inherently more resource-intensive to use these methods if your script is intended to write the HTML from which the browser creates the DOM in the first place.
Just write it and let the browser and interpreter do the work. That's what they are there for.
PS: I just tested using an onload param in the body tag and even at this point the document is still open and document.write() functions as intended. Also, there is no perceivable performance difference between the various methods in the latest version of Firefox. Of course there is a ton of caching probably going on somewhere in the hardware/software stack, but that's the point really - let the machine do the work. It may make a difference on a cheap smartphone though. Cheers!
The question depends on what you are actually trying to do.
Usually, instead of doing document.write you can use someElement.innerHTML or better, document.createElement with an someElement.appendChild.
You can also consider using a library like jQuery and using the modification functions in there: http://api.jquery.com/category/manipulation/
This is probably the most correct, direct replacement: insertAdjacentHTML.
Try to use getElementById() or getElementsByName() to access a specific element and then to use innerHTML property:
<html>
<body>
<div id="myDiv1"></div>
<div id="myDiv2"></div>
</body>
<script type="text/javascript">
var myDiv1 = document.getElementById("myDiv1");
var myDiv2 = document.getElementById("myDiv2");
myDiv1.innerHTML = "<b>Content of 1st DIV</b>";
myDiv2.innerHTML = "<i>Content of second DIV element</i>";
</script>
</html>
Use
var documentwrite =(value, method="", display="")=>{
switch(display) {
case "block":
var x = document.createElement("p");
break;
case "inline":
var x = document.createElement("span");
break;
default:
var x = document.createElement("p");
}
var t = document.createTextNode(value);
x.appendChild(t);
if(method==""){
document.body.appendChild(x);
}
else{
document.querySelector(method).appendChild(x);
}
}
and call the function based on your requirement as below
documentwrite("My sample text"); //print value inside body
documentwrite("My sample text inside id", "#demoid", "block"); // print value inside id and display block
documentwrite("My sample text inside class", ".democlass","inline"); // print value inside class and and display inline
I'm not sure if this will work exactly, but I thought of
var docwrite = function(doc) {
document.write(doc);
};
This solved the problem with the error messages for me.
I need to give the user a snippet of js code that will insert some HTML code into the page.
I'm wondering what the best method to do so is. Should I use document.write, should I just create all the HTML elements via DOM programmatically?
Is it possible to use a js library? I can see conflicts occurring if the webpage the code is embedded in already contains the library.
Using a library is probably too heavyweight, inserting DOM elements is very verbose and document.write may not work if the target site uses the application/xhtml+xml content type. I think your best bet is to construct one element using document.createElement and then setting innerHTML on that.
A suggestion:
Insert this DIV wherever you want the output to appear:
<div id="uniqueTargetID" style="display: none;"></div>
Then at bottom of page have this:
<script src="snippet.js"></script>
This file (remotely hosted or otherwise) contains could output simple text this way:
var html = [];
html.push('<h1>This is a title</h1>');
html.push('<p>So then she said, thats not a monkey, its a truck!</p>');
html.push('<p>You shoulda seen his face...</p>');
var target = document.getElementById('uniqueTargetID');
target.innerHTML = html.join('');
target.style.display = 'block';
I would avoid using document.write() if you can help it.
Javascript::
//to avoid global bashing
(function(){
var target = document.getElementById('ScriptName'),
parent = target.parentElement,
oput = document.createElement('div');
oput.innerHTML = "<p>Some Content</p>";
parent.insertBefore(oput, target);
}());
HTML to give to client/people::
<script type="text/javascript" id="ScriptName" src="/path/to/ScriptName.js"><script>
ScriptName should be something unique to your script.
If its simple insertion you can use pure js, otherwise if you want to provide some complex functionality you can use library. The best choice in this case will be the lib that does not extend root objects (Array, Function, String) to prevent conflicts (jQuery in noConflict mode, YUI, etc.).
Anyway it will be better to avoid using document.write u'd better use setting of innerHTML of existing element or create new one.