We Keep Coding

Increment loop but it increments at the end

I’m trying to use an increment loop but I want it to increment at the end of the loop. Sadly, whenever I simply put the i++ at the end of the loop it doesn’t behave like I’d expect or want it to. Anyone mind showing me the proper way of doing it?
The referred increment loop:
for (i = 1; i < 15; i++) {
// do somthing here
}
Here is the loop I’m working with:
for (i = 1; i < 15; i++) {
for (x = 1; x < 15; x++) {
var take = document.getElementById("row" + i + "sm" + x);
Tesseract.recognize(take)
.then(function(result) {
console.log(result.text);
// rows[i][x] = result.text;
})
}
}
What I’d like it to do:
for (i = 1; i < 15) {
for (x = 1; x < 15) {
var take = document.getElementById("row" + i + "sm" + x);
Tesseract.recognize(take)
.then(function(result) {
console.log(result.text);
//rows[i][x] = result.text;
x += 1;
})
i += 1;
}
}
I am using the for loop because I need to iterate over something one by one. How do I properly increment i at the end of the loop?
Here is a video explaining my problem with context and explanation why it is not an ASYNC problem. Sorry if it is hard to follow, ill update it with audio soon so I can explain it propperly.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1n1ZwNJif5Lb5zfLb2GPpBemObwpOqNf7/view

The problem is that the second one doesnt wait until first one is complete.
You can try with recursion inside then. There maybe some mistake with i,x but you get the point.
You execute first with i=1 and x=1, after the operation is done (then) you call the next until all elements are executed.
function execItem(i, x) {
var take = document.getElementById("row" + i + "sm" + x);
Tesseract.recognize(take)
.then(function(result){
rows[i][x] = result.text;
if (i < 15 && x < 15) {
if (i > 15) {
x += 1
i = 1
} else {
i += 1
}
execItem(i, x)
}
})
}
execItem(1, 1)

As a comment suggests this actually seems likely to be a problem with an asynchronous call (Tesseract...then) inside a loop. By the time the function inside then is called, your values of x and i have already moved on, so you don't get the result you expect.
One way around this would be to use a 'closure' - making a function that creates another function based on the value of i and x.
function getDisplayFunc(row, col) {
function displayRecognisedText(result) {
console.log(row, col, result.text);
//rows[row][col] = result.text;
}
return displayRecognisedText;
}
for (i = 1; i < 15; i++) {
for (x = 1; x < 15; x++) {
var take = document.getElementById("row" + i + "sm" + x);
Tesseract.recognize(take).then(getDisplayFunc(i, x));
}
}

I guess #Mike spot the error on: your code is asynchronous. What does it mean?
So, let's suppose you have this loop:
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
console.log(i);
}
It will print this, right?
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
However, you do not print your value inside the loop directly, but as a follow-up operation to a promise. This makes this code asynchronous. It means that it does not have to execute at the exact moment you call it. I do not have Tesseract here so I will make my loop asynchronous using another very old trick, setTimeout():
for (i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
setTimeout(function() {
console.log(i);
}, 0);
}
If I run it, I get this:
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
What happens is, when I pass the operation we want to do (in this case, printing the i value) to an asynchronous function (recognize().then() in your case, setTimeout() in my case) through a callback (function() {console.log(i);} in my example) the asynchronous function "schedules" the operation to execute as soon as possible, but this "soon" is not faster than the loop. So, the loop finishes executing but our callback is not called, not even once! Since you are not declaring i with let, it is a global variable, so there exists only one i. And since the loop finished, the value of the i variable is 10 already.
It used to be a hard thing to solve, but with ES6 it is quite straightforward: declare i with let!
for (let i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
setTimeout(function() {
console.log(i);
}, 0);
}
The let-ed variable has a new binding at each iteration of the loop, so in practice you have 10 variables called i. The closure of your function will have access only to the one with the right value!

Maybe you should try to use while loop.
Like this:
while i < 15:
//do something
i += 1
For two variables: x, i with embeding:
while x < 15:
//do something
while i < 15:
//do something2
i += 1
x += 1
Hope I understand the problem correctly.

fail to setTimeout in a for loop

I'm building a simon game. And after each round the player should see the moves he must play in the next round. So i created a function showMoves which flashes the square he has to play. The problem is that the function is not showing anything. Can anyone tell me what did i miss?
// the effect
function flasher(index) {
$(moves[index]).fadeIn(50).fadeOut(50).fadeIn(50).fadeOut(50).fadeIn(100);
}
var interval2;
// show the moves that supposed to be played
function showMoves() {
for (var i = 0; i < moves; i++) {
if (i === 0) {
interval2 = setTimeout(flasher(i), 1000);
} else {
interval2 = setTimeout(flasher(i), (i+1) * 1000);
}
}
}

setTimeout accepts a function as a first parameter. I assume that by calling flasher you tried to avoid this situation. In you case, this should be done like this:
function showMoves() {
for (var i = 0; i < moves; i++) {
if (i === 0) {
interval2 = setTimeout(function(i) {return function() {flasher(i)}}(i), 1000);
} else {
interval2 = setTimeout(function(i) {return function() {flasher(i)}}(i), (i+1) * 1000);
}
}
}

The setTimeout and setInterval are a little diffrent than we think about them.
They are save some event on specified times that will be fired in its times. Because of this they has a problem with loops:
for(i=0;i<3;i++)
{
setTimeout(function(){alert(i)}, i*1000);
}
after ending the loop the browser has 3 jobs to do:
alert(i) after 1 second
alert(i) after 2 seconds
alert(i) after 3 seconds
But what is the value of 'i'. If you are in c# programming after ending the loop 'i' will be disposed and we have not that.
But javascript does not dispose 'i' and we have it yet. So the browser set the current value for i that is 3. because when 'i' reaches to 3 loop goes end. Therefor Your browser do this:
alert(3) after 1 second
alert(3) after 2 seconds
alert(3) after 3 seconds
That is not what we want. But if change the above code to this:
for(i=0;i<3;i++){
(function (index)
{
setTimeout(function () { alert(index); }, i * 1000);
})(i);
}
We will have:
alert(0) after 1 second
alert(1) after 2 seconds
alert(2) after 3 seconds
So as Maximus said you mast make the browser to get value of i currently in loop. in this way:
setTimeout(function(i) {return function() {flasher(i)}}(i), (i+1) * 1000);
i does not leave out until end of loop and must be get value just now.

What I can derive from your code is that moves is an array, but you're using it as if it's an integer in the for loop. And that's why nothing happens at all.
Replace:
for (var i = 0; i < moves; i++) {
With:
for (var i = 0; i < moves.length; i++) {
And you should see things happening.
But you will notice flasher is called immediately, without timeout. And that's because the result of flasher is set to be called, instead of flasher itself.
Other answers here suggest using an wrapper function, but this requires workarounds to correctly pass the index to the function called by setTimeout.
So assuming that it doesn't have to run in IE8 and below, the following is the most concise solution:
setTimeout(flasher.bind(null, i), (i+1) * 1000)
Full working example:
var moves = [1, 2, 3, 4];
function flasher(index) {
console.log('move', moves[index]);
}
var interval2;
// show the moves that supposed to be played
function showMoves() {
for (var i = 0; i < moves.length; i++) {
interval2 = setTimeout(flasher.bind(null, i), (i+1) * 1000);
}
}
showMoves()

Javascript transitions not executing in order

I have a circle, consisting of 12 arc segments and I want to allow the user to see the transition from the start pattern to the end pattern. (there will be many start and end patterns).
Here is my code so far:
http://codepen.io/blazerix/pen/jrwNAG
function playAnimations(){
var totalLength = document.getElementsByClassName("container")[0].children.length
for(var i = 0; i < totalLength; i++){
var current_pattern = document.getElementsByClassName("container")[0].children[i]
console.log(current_pattern)
for(var j = 0; j < 12; j++){
$('#LED' + (j+1) ).css('transition-duration', '0s');
$('#LED' + (j+1) ).css({fill: current_pattern.children[1].children[j].style.backgroundColor});
}
setTimeout(function () {
for(var k = 0; k < 12; k++){
$('#LED' + (k+1) ).css('transition-duration', "" + current_pattern.children[3].children[0].value + "ms");
$('#LED' + (k+1) ).css({fill: current_pattern.children[2].children[k].style.backgroundColor});
}
}, 150);
}
}
The outer for loop goes through all of the patterns, and the two inner for loops will go through the start and end pattern respectively. For some reason, my program only displays the animation of the very last pattern. I suspect this is because the code is executing really quickly - however I am unsure of how to fix this.
Does anyone know a good workaround or what I could possibly do to rectify this issue? Any feedback or help is appreciated.

Ok, not entirely understanding all the parts of your code, I've whipped this up. It doesn't work just yet, but you may get the idea of what I'm trying to do: wait 250 milliseconds before you fire off the next animation, once you run out of siblings, bounce to the other animation. I can't spend any more time on this, but I hope this gets you where you want to be:
function playAnimations() {
var $patternHolder = $(".container");
playAnimation($('#LED1'), 0, $patternHolder, 1, 1);
}
function playAnimation($target, index, $patternHolder, childPatternIndex, animationNumber) {
//just set both fill color and transition in the object you pass in:
//.eq() chooses a child, returns jQuery object of that child by index
//Use jQuery to get background-color style
$target.css({ fill: $patternHolder.children(childPatternIndex).children().eq(index).css("background-color"), transition: "0s" });
setTimeout(function () {
if ($target.parent().next().length > 0) {
playAnimation($target.parent().next(), index++);
} else if (animationNumber == 1) {
playAnimation($("#LED1"), 0, patternHolder, 3, 2);
}
}, 250);
}

HTML5 WebWorkers, timed function

I am trying to get a WebWorker to count to 100 and update a div with the value of I, currently the div just updates straight to 100 and seems to ignore the interval....
JavaScript (webworker file):
self.addEventListener('message', function (e) {
switch (e.data) {
case 'Hi Worker':
postMessage('Hi Boss');
break
case 'Count to 100':
var i;
for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) {
setInterval(postMessage(i + 1), 1000);
}
break;
default:
self.postMessage("Not sure how to help with that");
}
}, false);
Main file:
<script>
var worker = new Worker('worker.js');
worker.addEventListener('message', function (e) {
console.log("worker said: " + "'" + e.data + "'");
document.getElementById("workerComms").textContent = "worker said: " + e.data;
}, false);
</script>
</head>
<body>
<button onclick="worker.postMessage('Hi Worker');return false;">Say 'Hi Worker'</button>
<button onclick="worker.postMessage('Count to 100');return false;">Count to 100</button>
<div id="workerComms">Things workers say...</div>

setInterval(postMessage(i + 1), 1000); calls postMessage(i + 1) and then passes the return value into setInterval, exactly the way foo(bar()) calls bar and passes the return value into foo.
Instead:
You want to pass a function reference to setInterval
You want to use setTimeout, not setInterval
You want to vary the timeout, because otherwise they'll all happen stacked on top of each other one second later
Something like:
for (i = 1; i <= 100; i++) {
setTimeout(postMessage.bind(window, i), 1000 * i);
}
would probably do it. That schedules 100 timers, at one-second intervals. It uses postMessage.bind(window, i) to create a function that, when called, will all postMessage with this set to window and passing in i as the first argument. I did i from 1 to 100 rather than 0 to 99 to avoid having to add 1 to it in both places I used it.
Alternately, you could ditch the for loop entirely and use setInterval or a chained series of setTimeout. Here's the setInterval:
var i = 0;
var timer = setInterval(function() {
postMessage(++i);
if (i >= 100) {
clearInterval(timer);
}
}, 1000);

Problem with setTimeout()

This is my code. What I want it to do is write 0, wait one sec, write 1, wait one sec, write 2, wait one sec, etc. Instead it writes 5 5 5 5 5
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
setTimeout("document.write(i + ' ')", 1000);
}
http://jsfiddle.net/Xb7Eb/

1) You set all the timeouts to last 1 second at the same time. The loop doesn't wait for the timeout to occur. So you have 5 timeouts that all execute at the same time.
2) When the timeouts execute, the loop is long since complete and i has become 5. So once they execute, they all print "5"
3) document.write() writes somthing onto the page, in the same place it executes. I.e. if you have <script>document.write("xyz")</script> in the middle of a piece of text, it'll write "xyz" in the middle of the text. The timeouts, however, are not necessarily anywhere on the page. They exist only in code.
Here's a solution that's as close to yours as possible: http://jsfiddle.net/rvbtU/1/
var container = document.getElementById("counter");
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
setTimeout("container.innerHTML += '" + i + " ';", 1000 * i);
}
However, that solution uses setTimeout's ability to evaluate a string as javascript, which is never a good idea.
Here's a solution that uses an anymous function instead: http://jsfiddle.net/YbPVX/1/
var container = document.getElementById("counter");
var writer = function(number) {
return function() { container.innerHTML += String(number) + " "; };
}
for(i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
setTimeout(writer(i), 1000 * i);
}
Edit: Forgot to save the 2nd fiddle. Whoops. Fixed now.

Most of the answers available are giving bad advice.* Specifically, you shouldn't be passing a string to setTimeout anymore (it still works, but it's discouraged), it's no longer 2000, there are better ways to do this.
setTimeout takes a function as the first parameter, and that's what you should do, however there are some issues when calling setTimeout in a loop.
This looks like it should work:
var i;
for ( i = 0; i < 5; i++ )
{
setTimeout(function(){
document.write( i + ' ' );
}, 1000 * (i + 1) );
}
But it doesn't. The issue is that by the time setTimeout executes the function, the loop will have incremented i to 5, so you'll get the same value repeated.
There are a few fixes. If you're willing to risk a with statement, you could try the following:
var i;
for ( i = 0; i < 5; i++ )
{
with( { i:i } )
{
setTimeout(function(){
document.write( i + ' ' );
}, 1000 * (i+1) );
}
}
Note that with is typically discouraged just like passing string values to setTimeout, so I don't really suggest this method of doing things.
The better way is to use a closure:
var i;
for ( i = 0; i < 5; i++ )
{
(function(i){
setTimeout(function(){
document.write( i + ' ' );
}, 1000 * (i+1) );
})(i);
}
To explain what's going on, the anonymous function wrapper (function(i){...code...}) executes immediately because it's wrapped in parens and passed i as a value:
(function(i){...code...})(i);
This forces the i variable that document.write uses to be a different one than what's being used in the for loop. You could even change the parameter used in the anonymous function wrapper if the difference gets too confusing:
(function(a){document.write(a+' ')})(i);
* when I started writing this question there were a number of answers describing how to fix the string to work with setTimeout, although they would technically work, they didn't include why they would work (because 'document.write("' + i + ' ");' evaluates i at the time of calling due to string concatenation, versus evaluating i at runtime like the previous version did), and they most certainly didn't mention that it's the bad old way of calling setTimeout.

try
var i = 1;
function timeout(){
document.write(i + ' ');
i++;
if (i == 5) return;
setTimeout(timeout, 1000);
}
timeout();
http://jsfiddle.net/nnJcG/1/

You have a problem with clousures, you can try this:
var timeout = function(){
var i = 0;
return function(){
document.write(i+ ' ');
i++;
if(i!==5)
setTimeout(timeout,1000);
};
}();
setTimeout(timeout,1000);
Here is the example in jsBin http://jsbin.com/uloyuc/edit

First of all, NEVER pass a string to setTimeout. Use a function, it's much cleaner.
Second, you have to "close over" the loop value. I bet this is what you want.
for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
(function(i) {
setTimeout(function() {
document.write(i + ' ')
}, i * 1000);
}(i));
}
See more about you a self executing function to close over a loop value here http://www.mennovanslooten.nl/blog/post/62
And just cause I love it, here is the equivalent in CoffeeScript whihc has the do keyword to help out with just this case.
for i in [0..4]
do (i) ->
setTimeout ->
document.write "#{ i } "
, i * 1000

You can also work with setInterval and clearInterval:
var i = 0;
var f = setInterval(function() {
if(i == 4) clearInterval(f);
document.write(++i + ' ');
}, 1000);
I think this code is very readable.

You could try like this:
var tick_limit = 5; // Or any number you wish representing the number of ticks
var counter = 0; // Or any number you wish
var timer_interval = 1000; // Interval for the counter
var timer;
function timerTick()
{
if(counter < tick_limit)
{
// Execute code and increase current count
document.body.innerHTML+=(counter + ' '); // Append the counter value to the body of the HTML page
counter++;
timer = setTimeout(timerTick,timer_interval);
}
else
{
// Reset everything
clearTimeout(timer);
counter = 0;
}
}
function startCounter()
{
clearTimeout(timer); // Stop current timer
timer = setTimeout(timerTick,timer_interval); // Start timer with any interval you wish
}
...
// Start timer when required
startCounter();
...
This way, calling the startCounter a number of times will result in a single timer executing the code

You're triggering five timeouts at the same time.
I like Pindatjuh's answer, but here's another fun way to do it.
This way starts the next timeout when the previous one is finished:
// Wrap everything in a self executing anonymous function so we don't pollute
// the global namespace.
//
// Note: Always use "var" statments or you will pollute the global namespace!
// For example "for(i = 0; i < 5; i++)" will pollute the global namespace
// unless you have "var i; for(i = 0; i < 5; i++)" or
// "for(var i = 0; i < 5; i++)" & all of that is not in the global namespace.
//
(function() {
// "i" will be available within doThis()
// you could also pass "i" as an argument
var i = 0,
doThis = function() {
// setTimeout can take an anonymous function
// or a regular function. This is better than
// eval-ing a string.
setTimeout(function() {
document.write(i + ' ');
++i;
// Do the function again if necessary
if (i < 5) doThis();
}, 1000);
}
// Let's begin!
doThis();
})();
Working Example