difference in jQuery object context - javascript

I'm trying to obtain some insight in the context of a jQuery object. I've read a ton of questions on SO, but they all want to fix a specific problem, and the answers thus fix the problem, and didn't really provide me with the knowledge I'm hoping for.
So I have two buttons, and I have a click event that listens for both of them like so:
$('#copyRI, #copyIR').click(function () {...}
Now when I try to establish which element was clicked like so:
$('#copyRI, #copyIR').click(function () {
var test = $(this);
var test2 = $('#copyIR');
var compare = (test === test2);
}
compare returns false when I click the button with id = #copyIR
when debugging I noticed that the context of test and test2 are different:
Now I'm not looking for a way to successfully establish which button was clicked, but I want to obtain some insight in the concept of the "context" in a jQuery object.
Thanks in advance!

When you call $(this) you create a new jQuery object, instantiating it with an HTML Element.
When you call $('#copyIR') you create a new jQuery object, instantiating it with a selector. This stores extra information in the object, including the selector itself.
Even if that wasn't the case, you would be creating two different objects and === (and == for that matter) test if two objects are the same object not if they are identical objects.
$(this) === $(this) would also return false.
If you want to test if the elements are the same, then you can compare the underlying DOM nodes (since those will be the same object)
var compare = (test[0] === test2[0]);
Alternatively, you can just test if the object you have in the first place matches the selector:
var compare = test.is('#copyIR');

You should rather use .is() method here.
Check the current matched set of elements against a selector, element, or jQuery object and return true if at least one of these elements matches the given arguments.
CODE:
$('#copyRI, #copyIR').click(function () {
var test = $(this);
var compare = test.is('#copyIR')
}

jQuery contexts (being an Object) are compared by reference, so test === test2 would obviously return false since each variable is pointing to a different jQuery context (the fact that both contexts internally contains a reference to same DOM object doesn't matter).
Try is() instead:
var compare = $(this).is('#copyIR');
See Documetnation

You could simply compare the id.
$('#copyRI, #copyIR').click(function () {
if (this.id === 'copyIR') {
// do something
}
}

Related

Javascript Object Passed Into Method Is A String

I'm building a phonegap project using jQuery mobile.
I have a javascript object that I'm iterating through.
Currently the problem is this:
Below is a method in my model object. It is self recursing, and once called, will recurse through itself to the next level every time a user clicks on a list item generated by the previous level of the object.
What I am battling with is passing the iterated segment, b, into the method itself as an object. For some reason this is returned as a string called [Object], and not the object itself.
This function does work as it's displaying the first level, but something about the "firstString" string I am creating for each child seems to be turning my object into a string named object. I have removed the quotes, placed the object in braces, to no avail.
Would anyone have any idea why this is happening, I'm obviously missing something important regarding passing objects into methods whose call is generated as a string...
My code is below, and line causing the issue is firstString+="model.recurseAppTree('"+b+"');";
recurseAppTree: function(AppTree)
{
$.each(AppTree, function(a,b)
{
var firstString='<li data-role="list-divider" role="heading" data-theme="b">'+b.DisplayValue+'</li>';
if(b.Children != null)
{
$.each(b.Children, function(c,d)
{
firstString+="<li data-theme='c'><a data-transition='slide' id='id-"+d.IdValue+"' href='javascript:void(0);'>"+d.DisplayValue+"</a></li>";
firstString+="<script>";
firstString+="$('#id-"+d.IdValue+"').click(function(){";
firstString+="model.recurseAppTree('"+b+"');";
firstString+="});";
firstString+="</script>";
});
}
$("#selectview").html(firstString);
$("#selectview").listview('refresh', true);
});
},
It's just normal.
You use an object in a string context by the concatenation with +. This tells JS to implicitely cast the object to a string.
b = {}
alert(typeof b) // object
alert(typeof (''+b)) // string
You should use event delegation for your gui
1- Add a (common) class to your '' tags, e.g. unrollLink :
var firstString='<li ...><a class="unrollLink" ...></a></li>"
2- Choose a node in your html, which is a parent of all your "tree" nodes, and will always be present in your html. Delegate the click handler to this node :
$('#selectview').on('click', '.unrollLink', function(){
//this === clicked link - write a function which returns the node you want based on the "id" you set
var myNode = getNode( this.id );
model.recurseAppTree( myNode );
});
3- change your function to produce the adequate html. You don't need to add code for the click events :
recurseAppTree: function(AppTree)
{
$.each(AppTree, function(a,b)
{
var firstString='<li data-role="list-divider" role="heading" data-theme="b">'+b.DisplayValue+'</li>';
if(b.Children != null)
{
$.each(b.Children, function(c,d)
{
// add the class you chose to the clickable items :
firstString+='<li data-theme="c"><a class="unrollLink" data-transition="slide" id="id-'+d.IdValue+'" href="javascript:void(0);">'+d.DisplayValue+'</a></li>';
});
}
$("#selectview").html(firstString);
$("#selectview").listview('refresh', true);
});
},

Javascript class initialization and jQuery DOM in memory

Which is the best way between:
var myClass = function() {
this.myContainer = function(){ return $(".container");}
this.mySubContainer = function(){ return this.myContainer().find(".sub"); }
}
AND
var myClass = function() {
this.myContainer = $(".container");
this.mySubContainer = this.myContainer.find(".sub");
}
Is there any concrete differences?
The memory problem arose when I have seen that my web page, that has enough javascript ( about 150KB of mine + libs ) takes more then 300-400MB of RAM. I'm trying to find out the problem and I don't know if this could be one of them.
function myClass{
this.myContainer = function(){ return $(".container");}
this.mySubContainer = function(){ return this.myContainer().find(".sub"); }
}
Here you will need to call it something like myClassInstance.myContainer() and that means jquery will search for .container element(s) any time you are using that function. Plus, it will create 2 additional closures any time you will create new instance of your class. And that will take some additional memory.
function myClass{
this.myContainer = $(".container");
this.mySubContainer = this.myContainer.find(".sub");
}
Here you will have myContainer pointing to an object which already contains all links to DOM nodes. jQuery will not search DOM any time you use myClassInstance.myContainer
So, second approach is better if you do not want to slow down your app. But first approach could be usefull if your DOM is frequently modified. But I do not beleave you have it modified so frequently that you may need to use second approach.
If there is a single variable you are trying to assign , then the second approach looks cleaner..
Yes they are different.
MODEL 1:
In the first model, myContainer is a function variable.It does not contain the jQuery object.You cannot call any of jQuery's methods on the objet. To actually get the jQuery object you will have to say
var obj = this.myContainer() or this.myContainer.call()
MODEL 2:
The second model stores the actual jQuery object.
try alerting this.myContainer in both models, u will seee the difference.
Yes this is different. after you fix your syntax error :
function myClass(){... // the parentheses
1st
When you create a new object var obj = new myClass(), you are creating two functions, and the jquery object is not returned until you call it
var container = obj.myContainer();
2nd
As soon as the object is initialized the dom is accessed and you have your objects cached for later use;
var container = obj.myContainer;

How to test if current browser supports a given tagName

I'd like to make a function to the effect of:
function supportsElem(tagName) {
// returns boolean
}
where:
supportsElem("div") // true
supportsElem("randomtext") // false
What the easiest way to do that?
Just a guess, cause i've never had to care about this. But it'd seem to me you could create the element and then check to make sure it acts like it should. For example, that it has certain properties, or that its constructor is right (or at least, isn't the same as a generic unsupported element would have).
An example of the constructor check (untested):
// pick a name that'll never be an element
var generic_element = document.createElement('randomtext');
var tagName_to_check = document.createElement('div');
if (tagName_to_check.constructor === generic_element.constructor) {
// the browser treats the node as a generic element, rather than
// (eg) a DivElement
// so it's probably unsupported
}
Try this:
function testTag(tagname) {
return document.createElement(tagname) instanceof HTMLUnknownElement;
}
I don't know what kind of browser support this (HTMLUnknownElement) will have though.
This is more effort than it's worth.
Just keep a dictionary of all the valid tags (easy to find online). Basically an array of strings
then its just
var dictionary = ["div", "a", "input", "span", ..., "td"];
var myTag = "div";
dictionary.indexOf(myTag); // if this doesn't return -1, then the tag is valid
You could simply create the element, then test it against a method specific to this element.

Is changing css styles via 'document.getElementById(o).style[p]=v' valid?

We are hoping on trimming some fat from our custom library we use across our products.
One commonly used action is changing of object styles.
Normally, we do this via:
document.getElementById('object').style.property='value';
I just tested the following in chromes console, and it worked:
function objStyle(o,p,v){
document.getElementById(o).style[p]=v;
}
objStyle('object','property','value');
Is this a valid way of doing things?
Any pitfalls one can think of when using this way of doing things? Crossbrowser compatability?
Yes, that is perfectly valid. A property that you access by .name can also be access by ['name'].
That works for any property in any object, for example:
window['alert']('Hello world.');
document['getElementById']('object')['style']['color'] = '#fff';
Your code is fine.
One thing I would consider though is whether you want to keep calling document.getElementById() (inside the function) if there is a situation where you need to perform multiple changes to the same element. What I'm about to suggest is overkill for the sake of showing you more options, but consider that you can pass the Id to your function, or pass a reference to the element directly, or have a function that accepts a string or an element reference and figures it out from the type of the parameter:
function objStyleById(oId,p,v){
document.getElementById(oId).style[p]=v;
}
function objStyle(o,p,v) {
o.style[p] = v;
}
function objStyleAuto(o,p,v) {
if (typeof o === "string")
o = document.getElementById("o");
// else not a string so assume o is element reference
o.style[p] = v;
}
objStyleById('object','property','value');
var myEl = document.getElementById("someElement");
objStyle(myEl,"prop","val");
objStyle(myEl,"prop2","val");
// some other non-style operation on myEl, e.g.,
myEl.className = "something";
myEl.innerHTML = "something";
objStyle(myEl.parentNode,"prop","value");
objStyleAuto('object','property','value');
objStyleAuto(myEl,'property','value');

Better Understanding Javascript by Examining jQuery Elements

Because jQuery is a widely used and mature collaborative effort, I can't help but to look at its source for guidance in writing better Javascript. I use the jQuery library all the time along with my PHP applications, but when I look under the hood of this rather sophisticated library I realize just how much I still don't understand about Javascript. Lo, I have a few questions for the SO community. First of all, consider the following code...
$('#element').attr('alt', 'Ivan is SUPER hungry! lolz');
vs
$('#element').attr({'alt': 'Ivan is an ugly monster! omfgz'});
Now, is this to say that the attr() method was designed to accept EITHER an attribute name, an attribute name and a value, or a pair-value map? Can someone give me a short explanation of what a map actually is and the important ways that it differs from an array in Javascript?
Moving on, the whole library is wrapped in this business...
(function(window, undefined) { /* jQuery */ })(window);
I get that the wrapped parentheses cause a behavior similar to body onLoad="function();", but what is this practice called and is it any different than using the onLoad event handler? Also, I can't make heads or tails of the (window) bit there at the end. What exactly is happening with the window object here?
Am I wrong in the assessment that objects are no different than functions in Javascript? Please correct me if I'm wrong on this but $() is the all encompassing jQuery object, but it looks just like a method. Here's another quick question with a code example...
$('#element').attr('alt', 'Adopt a Phantom Cougar from Your Local ASPCA');
... Should look something like this on the inside (maybe I'm wrong about this)...
function $(var element = null) {
if (element != null) {
function attr(var attribute = null, var value = null) {
/* stuff that does things */
}
}
}
Is this the standing procedure for defining objects and their child methods and properties in Javascript? Comparing Javascript to PHP, do you use a period . the same way you would use -> to retrieve a method from an object?
I apologize for this being a bit lengthy, but answers to these questions will reveal a great deal to me about jQuery and Javascript in general. Thanks!
1. Method overloading
$('#element').attr('alt', 'Ivan is SUPER hungry! lolz');
vs
$('#element').attr({'alt': 'Ivan is an ugly monster! omfgz'});
var attr = function (key, value) {
// is first argument an object / map ?
if (typeof key === "object") {
// for each key value pair
for (var k in key) {
// recursively call it.
attr(k, key[k]);
}
} else {
// do magic with key and value
}
}
2. Closures
(function(window, undefined) { /* jQuery */ })(window);
Is not used as an onload handler. It's simply creating new scope inside a function.
This means that var foo is a local variable rather then a global one. It's also creating a real undefined variable to use since Parameters that are not specified passes in undefined
This gaurds againts window.undefined = true which is valid / allowed.
the (window) bit there at the end. What exactly is happening with the window object here?
It's micro optimising window access by making it local. Local variable access is about 0.01% faster then global variable access
Am I wrong in the assessment that objects are no different than functions in Javascript?
Yes and no. All functions are objects. $() just returns a new jQuery object because internally it calls return new jQuery.fn.init();
3. Your snippet
function $(var element = null) {
Javascript does not support default parameter values or optional parameters. Standard practice to emulate this is as follows
function f(o) {
o != null || (o = "default");
}
Comparing Javascript to PHP, do you use a period . the same way you would use -> to retrieve a method from an object?
You can access properties on an object using foo.property or foo["property"] a property can be any type including functions / methods.
4. Miscellanous Questions hidden in your question
Can someone give me a short explanation of what a map actually is and the important ways that it differs from an array in Javascript?
An array is created using var a = [] it simply contains a list of key value pairs where all the keys are positive numbers. It also has all the Array methods. Arrays are also objects.
A map is just an object. An object is simply a bag of key value pairs. You assign some data under a key on the object. This data can be of any type.
For attr, if you give an object instead of a key value pair it will loop on each property.
Look for attr: in jQuery's code, then you'll see it use access. Then look for access: and you will see there is a check on the type of key if it is an object, start a loop.
The wrapping in a function, is to prevent all the code inside to be accessed from outside, and cause unwanted problems. The only parameters that are passed are window that allow to set globals and access the DOM. The undefined I guess it is to make the check on this special value quicker.
I read sometimes jQuery but I didn't start with it, may be you should get some good books to make you an idea first of what some advanced features Javascript has, and then apply your knowledge to the specifics of jQuery.
1 - Yes attr can accept a attribute name for getting a value, a name and a value for setting one value or a map of attribute names and values for settings more than one attribute
2 - A map is basically a JavaScript object e.g:
var map = {
'key1' : 'value1',
'key2' : 'value2'
};
3 - (function(window, undefined) { /* jQuery */ })(window); is something called an anonymous function as it doesn't have a name. In this case it also executes straight away.
A simple example would be:
function test(){
...
}
test();
//As an anonymous function it would be:
(function(){
...
}();
//And it you wanted to pass variables:
function test(abc){
...
}
test(abc);
//As an anonymous function it would be:
(function(abc){
...
}(abc);
this would make it different to the load event, as it is a function not an event.
4 - window is passed as a variable, as it is used internally within jQuery
5 - Objects and functions the same, as everything in JavaScript is an object. jQuery does something like this:
var obj = {
"init" : function(){
}
}
6 - Yes you can use . to retrieve a value on an object but you can also use [] e.g:
var map = {
"test" : 1
}
map.test //1
map["test"] //1
I hope this answers your many questions, let me know if I've missed anything out.
jQuery 1.6.1
The test is typeof key === "object"
if that is true, then you passed a { .... }
jQuery.fn.extend({
attr: function( name, value ) {
return jQuery.access( this, name, value, true, jQuery.attr );
},
// Mutifunctional method to get and set values to a collection
// The value/s can be optionally by executed if its a function
access: function( elems, key, value, exec, fn, pass ) {
var length = elems.length;
// Setting many attributes
if ( typeof key === "object" ) {
for ( var k in key ) {
jQuery.access( elems, k, key[k], exec, fn, value );
}
return elems;
}
// Setting one attribute
if ( value !== undefined ) {
// Optionally, function values get executed if exec is true
exec = !pass && exec && jQuery.isFunction(value);
for ( var i = 0; i < length; i++ ) {
fn( elems[i], key, exec ? value.call( elems[i], i, fn( elems[i], key ) ) : value, pass );
}
return elems;
}
// Getting an attribute
return length ? fn( elems[0], key ) : undefined;
},

Categories