I'm writing a small JavaScript framework for fun and possible implementation similar to backbone(hence the tag). I've started saving elements as object properties, as shown below. I'm not sure if I've seen this done, so I was curious if this causes any issues.
Similarly, If the module depends on other modules I list those at the top of the object in the form of....another object.
I wanted a way to list dependencies ( page elements or JavaScript modules ) and detect any issues up front. This has similar ( not same ) benefits as dependency injection.
This is a specific question on this code review post which explains a bit further on how the framework works.
/*MUserTry
**
**
**
*/
$A.modelAjax({
Name: 'MUserTry',
S: {
DynSma: SDynSma,
DynTwe: SDynTwe,
DynArc: SDynArc,
AniFlipPage: SAniFlipPage,
ClientStorage: SClientStorage
},
E: {
but: $A('#ut_but')[0]
},
J: {
box: $('#ut_box')
},
init: function () {
var pipe = {},
this_hold = this;
this.J.box.draggable();
this.E.but.addEventListener("click", function () {
pipe = $A.definePipe(this_hold.Name);
$A.ajaxMachine(pipe);
}, false);
},
pre: function (pipe) {
pipe.page.email = this.e_button.getAttribute('data-email');
pipe.proceed = true;
},
post: function (pipe) {
this.S.ClientStorage.setAll(pipe.server.smalls);
this.S.DynSma.run(pipe.server.smalls);
this.S.DynArc.run(pipe.server.arcmarks);
this.S.DynTwe.run(pipe.server.tweets);
this.S.AniFlipPage.run('ma');
},
finish: function (pipe) {
$A.log(pipe);
}
});
Ok first off let me offer the obligatory "you'll never get a better wheel by re-inventing the wheel" warning. Whatever you're trying to accomplish, you're almost certainly going to be more successful with it if you use an existing library. And even if there is good cause for you to make your own, it would still benefit you immensely to at least look at existing libraries.
But ... maybe you're just having fun with this project, and looking at other projects isn't fun so you're not doing it. Fair enough.
In any case, if you do look at Backbone, you'll find that this practice is core to the Backbone View class. Every View in Backbone has an "el" and "$el" property, which refer to the raw DOM element for the view and the jQuery-wrapped version of that element.
Backbone has no real performance issues with this because variables/properties in JS are just pointers; in other words, when you set the property of an object to an element, you aren't duplicating that element, you're just adding a reference to it (to put it another way, it's more like you're an A tag rather than a whole new document).
The one time Backbone does have a problem though (and your framework will too) is with stale references. In other words, if you just remove element X from the page, the browser will stop using memory for it (eventually, via garbage collection). But if there is an object out there which points to that element, it won't get garbage-collected, because anything with a reference isn't "garbage".
So, the main thing you have to watch out for is making sure that these objects either:
A) get deleted whenever their elements do, or
B) get rid of their references (eg. delete obj.reference) when their elements get deleted
If you don't do that, things will still probably work just fine ... until you use it on a page with lots of elements being created/deleted, at which point Firefox will start popping up "this script took way too long to run, are you really sure you want to be doing this?" messages.
Related
jQuery holds references to DOM nodes in its internal cache until I explicitly call $.remove(). If I use a framework such as React which removes DOM nodes on its own (using native DOM element APIs), how do I clean up jQuery's mem cache?
I'm designing a fairly large app using React. For those unfamiliar, React will tear down the DOM and rebuild as needed based on its own "shadow" DOM representation. The part works great with no memory leaks.
Flash forward, we decided to use a jQuery plugin. After React runs through its render loop and builds the DOM, we initialize the plugin which causes jQuery to hold a reference to the corresponding DOM nodes. Later, the user changes tabs on the page and React removes those DOM elements. Unfortunately, because React doesn't use jQuery's $.remove() method, jQuery maintains the reference to those DOM elements and the garbage collector never clears them.
Is there a way I can tell jQuery to flush its cache, or better yet, to not cache at all? I would love to still be able to leverage jQuery for its plugins and cross-browser goodness.
jQuery keeps track of the events and other kind of data via the internal API jQuery._data() however due to this method is internal, it has no official support.
The internal method have the following signature:
jQuery._data( DOMElement, data)
Thus, for example we are going to retrieve all event handlers attached to an Element (via jQuery):
var allEvents = jQuery._data( document, 'events');
This returns and Object containing the event type as key, and an array of event handlers as the value.
Now if you want to get all event handlers of a specific type, we can write as follow:
var clickHandlers = (jQuery._data(document, 'events') || {}).click;
This returns an Array of the "click" event handlers or undefined if the specified event is not bound to the Element.
And why I speak about this method? Because it allow us tracking down the event delegation and the event listeners attached directly, so that we can find out if an event handler is bound several times to the same Element, resulting in memory leaks.
But if you also want a similar functionality without jQuery, you can achieve it with the method getEventHandlers
Take a look at this useful articles:
getEventHandlers
getEventListeners - chrome
getEventListeners - firebug
Debugging
We are going to write a simple function that prints the event handlers and its namespace (if it was specified)
function writeEventHandlers (dom, event) {
jQuery._data(dom, 'events')[event].forEach(function (item) {
console.info(new Array(40).join("-"));
console.log("%cnamespace: " + item.namespace, "color:orangered");
console.log(item.handler.toString());
});
}
Using this function is quite easy:
writeEventHandlers(window, "resize");
I wrote some utilities that allow us keep tracking of the events bound to DOM Elements
Gist: Get all event handlers of an Element
And if you care about performance, you will find useful the following links:
Leaking Memory in Single Page Apps
Writing Fast, Memory-Efficient JavaScript
JavaScript Memory Profiling
I encourage anybody who reads this post, to pay attention to memory allocation in our code, I learn the performance problems ocurrs because of three important things:
Memory
Memory
And yes, Memory.
Events: good practices
It is a good idea create named functions in order to bind and unbind event handlers from DOM elements.
If you are creating DOM elements dynamically, and for example, adding handlers to some events, you could consider using event delegation instead of keep bounding event listeners directly to each element, that way, a parent of dynamically added elements will handle the event. Also if you are using jQuery, you can namespace the events ;)
//the worse!
$(".my-elements").click(function(){});
//not good, anonymous function can not be unbinded
$(".my-element").on("click", function(){});
//better, named function can be unbinded
$(".my-element").on("click", onClickHandler);
$(".my-element").off("click", onClickHandler);
//delegate! it is bound just one time to a parent element
$("#wrapper").on("click.nsFeature", ".my-elements", onClickMyElement);
//ensure the event handler is not bound several times
$("#wrapper")
.off(".nsFeature1 .nsFeature2") //unbind event handlers by namespace
.on("click.nsFeature1", ".show-popup", onShowPopup)
.on("click.nsFeature2", ".show-tooltip", onShowTooltip);
Circular references
Although circular references are not a problem anymore for those browsers that implement the Mark-and-sweep algorithm in their Garbage Collector, it is not a wise practice using that kind of objects if we are interchanging data, because is not possible (for now) serialize to JSON, but in future releases, it will be possible due to a new algorithm that handles that kind of objects. Let's see an example:
var o1 = {};
o2 = {};
o1.a = o2; // o1 references o2
o2.a = o1; // o2 references o1
//now we try to serialize to JSON
var json = JSON.stringify(o1);
//we get:"Uncaught TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON"
Now let's try with this other example
var freeman = {
name: "Gordon Freeman",
friends: ["Barney Calhoun"]
};
var david = {
name: "David Rivera",
friends: ["John Carmack"]
};
//we create a circular reference
freeman.friends.push(david); //freeman references david
david.friends.push(freeman); //david references freeman
//now we try to serialize to JSON
var json = JSON.stringify(freeman);
//we get:"Uncaught TypeError: Converting circular structure to JSON"
PD: This article is about Cloning Objects in JavaScript. Also this gist contain demos about cloning objects with circular references: clone.js
Reusing objects
Let's follow some of the programming principles, DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself) and instead of creating new objects with similar functionality, we can abstract them in a fancy way. In this example I will going to reuse an event handler (again with events)
//the usual way
function onShowContainer(e) {
$("#container").show();
}
function onHideContainer(e) {
$("#container").hide();
}
$("#btn1").on("click.btn1", onShowContainer);
$("#btn2").on("click.btn2", onHideContainer);
//the good way, passing data to events
function onToggleContainer(e) {
$("#container").toggle(e.data.show);
}
$("#btn1").on("click.btn1", { show: true }, onToggleContainer);
$("#btn2").on("click.btn2", { show: false }, onToggleContainer);
And there are a lot of ways to improve our code, having an impact on performance, and preventing memory leaks. In this post I spoke mainly about events, but there are other ways that can produce memory leaks. I suggest read the articles posted before.
Happy reading and happy coding!
If your plugin exposes a method to programatically destroy one of its instances (i.e. $(element).plugin('destroy')), you should be calling that in the componentWillUnmount lifecycle of your component.
componentWillUnmount is called right before your component is unmounted from the DOM, it's the right place to clean up all external references / event listeners / dom elements your component might have created during its lifetime.
var MyComponent = React.createClass({
componentDidMount() {
$(React.findDOMNode(this.refs.jqueryPluginContainer)).plugin();
},
componentWillUnmount() {
$(React.findDOMNode(this.refs.jqueryPluginContainer)).plugin('destroy');
},
render() {
return <div ref="jqueryPluginContainer" />;
},
});
If your plugin doesn't expose a way to clean up after itself, this article lists a few ways in which you can try to dereference a poorly thought out plugin.
However, if you are creating DOM elements with jQuery from within your React component, then you are doing something seriously wrong: you should almost never need jQuery when working with React, since it already abstracts away all the pain points of working with the DOM.
I'd also be wary of using refs. There are only few use cases where refs are really needed, and those usually involve integration with third-party libraries that manipulate/read from the DOM.
If your component conditionally renders the element affected by your jQuery plugin, you can use callback refs to listen to its mount/unmount events.
The previous code would become:
var MyComponent = React.createClass({
handlePluginContainerLifecycle(component) {
if (component) {
// plugin container mounted
this.pluginContainerNode = React.findDOMNode(component);
$(this.pluginContainerNode).plugin();
} else {
// plugin container unmounted
$(this.pluginContainerNode).plugin('destroy');
}
},
render() {
return (
<div>
{Math.random() > 0.5 &&
// conditionally render the element
<div ref={this.handlePluginContainerLifecycle} />
}
</div>
);
},
});
How about do this when the user exits the tab:
for (x in window) {
delete x;
}
This is much better to do, though:
for (i in $) {
delete i;
}
I'm new to Meteor.js, so hopefully this is an inability on my part rather than a limitation of the platform because it's pretty amazing otherwise.
What I'm trying to achieve is pretty straightforward: run Javascript whenever a template helper gets updated with new data (but not from the db!).
A simple example scenario could be this: A user makes a request to get some images. But rather than the images just "popping up", they should be hidden and fadein once they've been fully loaded (among other things like positioning them, etc.).
In other words, right after the helper receives new data, a function should run to do something with that data (that can not be done on the server before it is actually rendered).
If the data is from a collection, it's quite easy to achieve this with a subscribe callback.
However, there seems to be no callback for once a helper has rendered the new data.
Yes, it's possible to add a timeout of a few ms, but that's not a clean or reliable solution in my mind, because you obviously never know exactly how long it will need to render.
I've searched through dozens of seemingly related posts, but was not able to find anything that could be considered a "standard" way of achieving this...
Here's a bit of (simplified) example code to illustrate the scenario:
var images = [];
//When showImages is updated with new data from the images array...
Template.gallery.helpers({
showImages: function () {
return images;
}
});
//...this function should fire
function doMagicWork () {
...
}
//Because firing it on the on click event would be too soon,
//as the helper hasn't rendered yet
Template.gallery.events({
"click #fetch_images": function (event) {
Meteor.call("getImagesFromServer", function(error, result) {
images = result.content;
});
}
});
There is a pending feature for adding animation/transition support for UI changes (referenced here)
As an interim solution, you can use Blaze UI hooks. There are quite a few packages that use them. example here and here
In general, , Meteor way is to reduce the amount of boiler plate code. Smooth transition is something of a pattern rather than an individual thing for element and should be treated as such as per meteor philosophy.
I have been writing a reusable script, let's call it a plugin although it's not jQuery, that can be initialised in a declarative way from the HTML. I have extremely simplified it to explain my question so let's say that if a user inserts a tag like:
<span data-color="green"></span>
the script will fire because the attribute data-color is found, changing the color accordingly.
This approach proved very handy because it avoids anyone using the plugin having to initialise it imperatively in their own scripts with something like:
var elem = document.getElementsByTagName('span')[0];
myPlugin.init(elem);
Moreover by going the declarative way I could get away without defining any global (in this case myPlugin), which seemed to be a nice side effect.
I simplified this situation in an example fiddle here, and as you can see a user can avoid writing any js, leaving the configuration to the HTML.
Current situation
The plugin is wrapped in a closure like so:
;(function(){
var changeColor = {
init : function(elem){
var bg = elem.getAttribute('data-color');
elem.style.background = bg;
}
};
// the plugin itslef looks for appropriate HTML elements
var elem = document.querySelectorAll('[data-color]')[0];
// it inits itself as soon as it is evaluated at page load
changeColor.init(elem);
})();
The page loads and the span gets the correct colour, so everything is fine.
The problem
What has come up lately, though, is the need to let the user re-evaluate/re-init the plugin when he needs to.
Let's say that in the first example the HTML is changed dynamically after the page is loaded, becoming:
<span data-color="purple"></span>
With the first fiddle there's no way to re-init the plugin, so I am now testing some solutions.
Possible solutions
Exposing a global
The most obvious is exposing a global. If we go this route the fiddle becomes
http://jsfiddle.net/gleezer/089om9z5/4/
where the only real difference is removing the selection of the element, leaving it to the user:
// we remove this line
// var elem = document.querySelectorAll('[data-color]')[0];
and adding something like (again, i am simplifying for the sake of the question):
window.changeColor = changeColor;
to the above code in order to expose the init method to be called from anywhere.
Although this works I am not satisfied with it. I am really looking for an alternative solution, as I don't want to lose the ease of use of the original approach and I don't want to force anyone using the script adding a new global to their projects.
Events
One solution I have found is leveraging events. By putting something like this in the plugin body:
elem.addEventListener('init', function() {
changeColor.init(elem);
}, false);
anybody will be able to just create an event an fire it accordingly. An example in this case:
var event = new CustomEvent('init', {});
span.dispatchEvent(event);
This would re-init the plugin whenever needed. A working fiddle is to be found here:
http://jsfiddle.net/gleezer/tgztjdzL/1/
The question (finally)
My question is: is there a cleaner/better way of handling this?
How can i let people using this plugin without the need of a global or having to initialise the script themselves the first time? Is event the best way or am I missing some more obvious/better solutions?
You can override Element.setAttribute to trigger your plugin:
var oldSetAttribute = Element.prototype.setAttribute;
Element.prototype.setAttribute = function(name, value) {
oldSetAttribute.call(this, name, value);
if (name === 'data-color') {
changeColor.init(this);
}
}
Pros:
User does not have to explicitly re-initialize the plugin. It will happen automatically when required.
Cons:
This will, of course, only work if the user changes data-color attributes using setAttribute, and not if they create new DOM elements using innerHTML or via some other approach.
Modifying host object prototypes is considered bad practice by many, and for good reasons. Use at your own risk.
I came across a strange requirement (set by myself)...
I'm creating an easy to integrate ajax content loader plugin with lots of options and callbacks. Since the loader is a class and the developer can have multiple instances on a single page, I wanted to get rid of all the ugly code required for every single initialization and decided to use data attributes instead - they look awesome and proficient!
The question is: How to add functions and javascript in general inside a data attribute?
Example:
var url = "someurl/goes/here/";
var Template = new TemplateEngine('Name', {
onCreate: function(template, parts) {
// do something with template parts
template.ID += 1;
},
onRender: function(template, parts) {
template.addClass('flash');
}
});
var settings = {
container: DOM_ELEMENT|STRING,
template: Template,
disableDefaultRender: true,
// a bunch of hooks and callbacks like this:
onBeforeRequest: function(loader, data) {
new_data = data;
// modify request data somehow
loader.requestData = new_data;
},
onRender: function(loader, data) {
loader.renderData(data, function(part) {
// define specific rendering logic for different template parts
// in required
});
},
onAfterRequest: function(loader, data) {
},
onError: function(loader, data) {
}
// etc, etc
};
var THE_LOADER = new SuperFancyAjaxLoader(url, settings);
My original idea is to somehow put all of the above inside the said data attribute:
<div data-fancy-stuff="{all-or-most-of-the-above}">more stuff</div>
and make the script itself find all elements and initialize instances for each of them like so:
var elements = document.querySelector('[data-fancy-stuff]');
for(item in elements) {
try {
var data = elements[item].getAttribute('data-fancy-stuff');
var THE_LOADER = new SuperFancyAjaxLoader(data.url, data.settings);
} catch (ex) {
console.log('Someone messed with prototypes');
}
}
Is the idea of putting javascript functions inside an attribute idiotic? Or is there a way to actually put some js inside an attribute?
I understand that if there's so much javascript required, it's pointless to try and put it inside an attribute, but in real life cases (for this particular task), I will have 3-5 content loaders per page, most of them (or all) will use the same template and rendering logic, but they will all have to modify the request data differently by themselves.
p.s. Eval is Evil.
edit: I'm open to design proposals which do not involve third party MVC frameworks.
May be I don't understand well, but You want provide some JavaScipt modules/classes/objects through HTML5 attribute???
I think it's bad design. It's seems to be mixin of distinct layers.
So technically U have just ONE ability - to call eval, even after your PS because eval is the only point where JavaScript can get other JavaScript from String - ONLY.
But if U want dynamically load some complex javascript as reaction to data in some elements it's very good idea to learn and apply most ultimate thing for such scenarios - well-old-knownn require.js http://requirejs.org/. And if you want hardly bind DOM with some data and behavior you must to learn some of MVC JavaScript solutions - AngularJS, Backbome, Amber and so on.
By design u have to split your application to presentation layer where DOM will live and business layer were JavaScript will live. To bind them to each other you use string/JSON descriptors in DOM attribute and load JavaScript dynamically using on-fly head rewriting or by XHR+eval, such design is asynchronous, quick and is main choise of all solid network-based applications from gmail to all-other-cool-staff. To help build application with such model - require.js is best and most known helper.
I need to be able to determine when an object is created (not a DOM element -- a JavaScript object).
An answer to this question has some very useful looking code for creating observable properties, so you can have a function fire when a property changes.
In my situation I need to do something when the object/property is created, not an existing property changed, and my limited understanding of such matters did not help me figure out if or how I could use that code to do this after much squinting.
The situation is: page loads a bunch of scripts. Some of the scripts create things that are needed by other scripts, e.g:
ThisStuff = (function () {
// blah blah
return self;
} ());
Some other code needs to initialize this ThisStuff, whenever it's available, which may be after the DOM is done loading. The user doesn't actually need ThisStuff right away, so it's fine for it to happen whenever the script is done loading. So I would like to do something along lines of:
$(document).ready(function() {
wheneverIsAvailable(window,'ThisStuff', function(object) {
object.init(args);
})
});
I realize there are other solutions to this problem (changing script order, or loading scripts on demand) but those are difficult because of the architecture. So I'm only interested in a way to do this versus other solutions. If jQuery offers some such functionality, that's fine also as I'm using it.
You could have a setInterval checking a number of times a second to watch the specific variable. You can check whether it is created using obj.hasOwnProperty(prop). When it is created, you invoke the function, and clear the interval.
It might be dirty but it might also just work fine for you.
Edit: I coded this for you: http://jsfiddle.net/jhXJ2/2/. It also supports passing additional arguments to the function.
window.__intervals = [];
function wheneverIsAvailable(obj, prop, func) {
var id = (Math.random()+"").substring(2);
var args = arguments;
window.__intervals[id] = window.setInterval(function() {
if(obj.hasOwnProperty(prop)) {
window.clearInterval(window.__intervals[id]);
func(Array.prototype.slice.call(args, 3));
// Call function with additional parameters passed
// after func (from index 3 and on)
}
}, 1000/ 50);
}
wheneverIsAvailable(window, 'test', function() {
alert(arguments[0]);
}, 'Woot!');
window.setTimeout('window.test = 123', 1000);
This is a bit far-fetched but it might work.
You would need to use knockoutjs, a javascript library. It's awesome but is built for a slightly different purpose.
Anyways it has a dependentObservable thing which allows to fire up an event whenever a certain value changes. Now I know you want on creation but you can check whether your variable holds any value (other than what you provided initially), if yes then consider it initialize.
Let me know if you think this sounds feasible.