I am using an already defined function and now want to add a pollServer function to it so that this functions runs over and over. I keep getting errors when I try to wrap the existing function in another. Is there a better way to do this?
function callD(id) {
jQuery('document').ready(function pollServer(){
window.setTimeout(function () {
var ab = document.getElementById('a')
console.log(ab);
var bod = document.getElementById(+id)
if (ab == null) {
bod.style.background='green'
} else {
bod.style.background='blue'
}
}, 1200);
})
}
callD();
pollServer();
pollServer isn't defined where you're calling it. Also id isn't being passed to callD, and you also have a +id which doesn't make sense in a document.getElementByid, since if there's any non-number in the ID, that would be NaN. You're also not polling a server, you're setting a timeout once and doing some work that doesn't involve a server. You would want setInterval for regular polling, or to call the function again on some condition like a failure.
$(document).ready(function () {
var intervalId;
function callD(id) {
function pollServer() {
intervalId = window.setInterval(function () {
var ab = document.getElementById('a')
console.log(ab);
var bod = document.getElementById(id)
if (ab == null) {
bod.style.background='green'
} else {
bod.style.background='blue'
}
}, 1200);
}
pollServer();
}
callD('some-id');
// on some condtion eventually:
clearInterval(intervalId);
})
Yeah, jQuery can make things pretty gnarly with all the nested callbacks. To make the code cleaner and easier to understand, I like to split my functions up and define them all at the top-most level of the script, then compose them together like so:
/**
* this function will check for the existing elements
* and update styles
*/
function setBodyStyle(id) {
var ab = document.getElementById('a');
console.log(ab);
var bod = document.getElementById(+id);
if (ab == null) {
bod.style.background='green';
} else {
bod.style.background='blue';
}
}
/**
* this function will create a timeout or interval
* which will in turn run setBodyStyle()
*/
function pollServer() {
// I think you want setInterval here if you're polling?
// setInterval will run _every_ 1200ms,
// setTimeout only runs once after 1200ms
window.setInterval(function() {
// not sure where you're getting id from,
// but you'll want to pass it here
setBodyStyle();
}, 1200);
}
// when the document is ready, run pollServer()
jQuery(document).ready(pollServer);
Having small functions that do one thing is just best-practice for the reasons I mentioned above. This will help your script be more understandable, which will help you find bugs.
For example, two things I don't understand about your code above:
where does the id variable come from? I don't see you passing it to your function from anywhere
how does your script poll the server? I don't see the code for that anywhere either.
Seemed you mean run the function pollServer every 1.2 sec. If so, you'd need to do two things
Use setInterval rather than setTimeout
Delete the last line for the pollServer function, because it is not accessible from outside the ready function block.
This is originally from (Pause execution in while loop locks browser (updated with fiddles))
I have been at this all day and I can't figure out how to keep javascript from advancing to the next line and in essence executing all lines at once. I have tried every combination of delay / setTimeout I can think of to no avail.
I just want the elements in the array to flash once then pause, then do it again for another element in the array till all elements have been removed and the array is empty.
But because javascript is executing all lines at once I end up with the appearance of all elements flashing at the same time.
Here is the fiddle:
http://jsfiddle.net/ramjet/xgz52/7/
and the relevant code:
FlashElement: function () {
while (elementArray.length) {
alert('a ' + elementArray.length);
var $el = elementArray.eq(Math.floor(Math.random() * elementArray.length));
PageLoadAnimation.FlashBlast($el);
alert('delay complete');
elementArray = elementArray.not($el);
alert('array popped');
alert('z ' + elementArray.length);
}
},
ANSWER FOR THIS SITUATION. Hopefully it will help others.
As Zach Saucier points out the loop was really my problem...but not the only problem. I was the other problem(s).
Me first.
Fool that I am I was really causing my own complications with two things I was doing wrong.
First using jsfiddle my javascript would error due to syntax or some such thing but fiddle doesn't tell you that (to my knowledge) so my fiddle wouldn't run but I took it in pride as MY CODE IS FINE stupid javascript isn't working.
Second I was passing my function to setTimeout incorrectly. I was adding the function parens () and that is not correct either which would bring me back to issue one above.
WRONG: intervalTimer = setInterval(MyFunction(), 1500);
RIGHT: intervalTimer = setInterval(MyFunction, 1500);
As for the code. As Zach pointed out and I read here (http://javascript.info/tutorial/settimeout-setinterval) while he was responding setting a timeout in a loop is bad. The loop will iterate rapidly and with the timeout one of the steps in the loop we get into a circular firing squad.
Here is my implementation:
I created a couple variables but didn't want them polluting the global scope so I created them within the custom domain. One to hold the array of elements the other the handle to the setInterval object.
var PageLoadAnimation =
{
elementArray: null,
intervalTimer: null,
....
}
In my onReady function (the one the page calls to kick things off) I set my domain array variable and set the interval saving the handle for use later. Note that the interval timer is how long I want between images flashes.
onReady: function ()
{
elementArray = $('#PartialsContainer').children();
//black everything out just to be sure
PageLoadAnimation.BlackOutElements();
//flash & show
intervalTimer = setInterval(PageLoadAnimation.FlashElement, 1500);
},
Now instead of looping through the array I am executing a function at certain intervals and just tracking how many elements are left in the array to be flashed. Once there are zero elements in the array I kill the interval execution.
FlashElement: function ()
{
if(elementArray.length > 0) //check how many elements left to be flashed
{
var $el = PageLoadAnimation.GrabElement(); //get random element
PageLoadAnimation.FlashBlast($el); //flash it
PageLoadAnimation.RemoveElement($el); //remove that element
}
else
{
//done clear timer
clearInterval(intervalTimer);
intervalTimer = null;
}
},
So the whole thing is:
var PageLoadAnimation =
{
elementArray: null,
intervalTimer: null,
onReady: function () {
elementArray = $('#PartialsContainer').children();
//black everything out just to be sure
PageLoadAnimation.BlackOutElements();
//flash & show
intervalTimer = setInterval(PageLoadAnimation.FlashElement, 1500);
//NOT this PageLoadAnimation.FlashElement()
},
BlackOutElements: function () {
$('#PartialsContainer').children().hide();
},
FlashElement: function ()
{
if(elementArray.length > 0)
{
var $el = PageLoadAnimation.GrabElement();
PageLoadAnimation.FlashBlast($el);
PageLoadAnimation.RemoveElement($el);
}
else
{
//done clear timer
clearInterval(intervalTimer);
intervalTimer = null;
}
},
GrabElement: function()
{
return elementArray.eq(Math.floor(Math.random() * elementArray.length));
},
RemoveElement: function($el)
{ elementArray = elementArray.not($el); },
FlashBlast: function ($el) {
//flash background
$el.fadeIn(100, function () { $el.fadeOut(100) });
}
}
Hope that help others understand the way to go about pausing execution in javascript.
The reason why you were having trouble is because setTimeout function is non-blocking and will return immediately. Therefore the loop will iterate very quickly, initiating each of the timeouts within milliseconds of each other instead of including the previous one's delay
As a result, you need to create a custom function that will wait on the setInterval to finish before running again
FlashElement: function () { // Call it where you had the function originally
myLoop();
},
...
function myLoop() {
setTimeout(function () { // call a setTimeout when the loop is called
var $el = elementArray.eq(Math.floor(Math.random() * elementArray.length));
PageLoadAnimation.FlashBlast($el);
elementArray = elementArray.not($el);
if (0 < elementArray.length) { // if the counter < length, call the loop function
myLoop();
}
}, 1000)
}
Feel free to change the delay to whatever value you wish (3000ms to let each fade finish before the last at the moment). If you want to start the fade in of the next before the previous ends and keep them in their original positions you would have to animate the opacity using .css instead of using fadeIn and fadeOut
My answer is based on this answer from another SO question
I'm trying to understand this example code, what is the function of line 15, why start(timeout)? (Sorry, I'm new to programming)
var schedule = function (timeout, callbackfunction) {
return {
start: function () {
setTimeout(callbackfunction, timeout)
}
};
};
(function () {
var timeout = 1000; // 1 second
var count = 0;
schedule(timeout, function doStuff() {
console.log(++count);
schedule(timeout, doStuff);
}).start(timeout);
})();
// "timeout" and "count" variables
// do not exist in this scope.
...why start(timeout)?
In that example, there's actually no reason for passing timeout into start, since start doesn't accept or use any arguments. The call may as well be .start().
What's happening is that schedule returns an object the schedule function creates, and one of the properties on that object is called start, which is a function. When start is called, it sets up a timed callback via setTimeout using the original timeout passed into schedule and the callback function passed into schedule.
The code calling schedule turns around and immediately calls the start function on the object it creates.
In the comments, Pointy points out (well, he would, wouldn't he?) that the callback function is calling schedule but not doing anything with the returned object, which is pointless — schedule doesn't do anything other than create and return the object, so not using the returned object makes the call pointless.
Here's the code with those two issues addressed:
var schedule = function (timeout, callbackfunction) {
return {
start: function () {
setTimeout(callbackfunction, timeout)
}
};
};
(function () {
var timeout = 1000; // 1 second
var count = 0;
schedule(timeout, function doStuff() {
console.log(++count);
schedule(timeout, doStuff).start(); // <== Change here
}).start(); // <== And here
})();
It's not very good code, though, frankly, even with the fixes. There's no particularly good reason for creating a new object every time, and frankly if the book is meant to be teaching, this example could be a lot clearer. Inline named function expressions and calls to methods on objects returned by a function...absolutely fine, but not for teaching. Still, I don't know the context, so those comments come with a grain of salt.
Here's a reworked version of using the schedule function by reusing the object it returns, and being clear about what bit is happening when:
(function () {
var timeout = 1000; // 1 second
var count = 0;
// Create the schedule object
var scheduleObject = schedule(timeout, doStuff);
// Set up the first timed callback
scheduleObject.start();
// This is called by each timed callback
function doStuff() {
// Show the count
console.log(++count);
// Set up the next timed callback
scheduleObject.start();
}
})();
The function schedule is executed as a function. That function returns an object. Like you can see with the { start... }. With the returned object it calls out the start function. This is called chaining. So the start function is executed after is set the function.
What is strange is that the timeout is passed to the start function which has no parameters.
I need help understanding why the following piece of code returns an undefined object property:
var count = 0;
var intervals = {
collection : []
}
intervals.collection[0] = function () {
this.timer = setInterval(function(){
count++;
$("p").html(count);
}, 1000);
}();
if(typeof intervals.collection[0] === "undefined") {
$("span").html("undefined");
}
Working Example: http://jsfiddle.net/tvaQk/8/
Basically, I'd like to be able to keep a collection of setIntervals that I can reference later so I can loop through and clear. I was thinking I'd be able to loop through the intervals.collection array and do something like:
clearInterval(intervals.collection[0].timer)
but cannot since intervals.collection[0] is undefined
You forgot the return.
intervals.collection[0] = function () {
return this.timer = setInterval(function(){
--^^^^^^--
Notice this refers to window, I'm not sure if adding a property timer to the window element is what you were expecting actually. Otherwise, you shall return the interval id to not clutter the global window scope.
A short way to being able to access the timer using intervals.collection[0].timer is by creating an Object instead:
intervals.collection.push({
timer: setInterval(function(){
count++;
$("p").html(count);
}, 1000)
});
console.log(intervals.collection[0].timer);
I used Array.push in this example to add the newly created interval as the last element of the array.
Maybe you're complicating things... What I would do is just push the interval straight into the array.
intervals.collection.push( setInterval(function(){...}, 1000) );
You don't need an IIFE to execute the interval, when you push it into the array it'll execute as well.
Then you can clear them all like:
intervals.collection.forEach(function( timer ) {
clearInterval( timer );
});
You could simply write it like this:
intervals.collection[0] = setInterval(function(){
$("p").html(++count);
}, 1000);
You're assigning a self-invoking function, which means you assign the return value of the function. The function itself doesn't return anything therefore it's undefined.
It's there a way to configure the setInterval method of javascript to execute the method immediately and then executes with the timer
It's simplest to just call the function yourself directly the first time:
foo();
setInterval(foo, delay);
However there are good reasons to avoid setInterval - in particular in some circumstances a whole load of setInterval events can arrive immediately after each other without any delay. Another reason is that if you want to stop the loop you have to explicitly call clearInterval which means you have to remember the handle returned from the original setInterval call.
So an alternative method is to have foo trigger itself for subsequent calls using setTimeout instead:
function foo() {
// do stuff
// ...
// and schedule a repeat
setTimeout(foo, delay);
}
// start the cycle
foo();
This guarantees that there is at least an interval of delay between calls. It also makes it easier to cancel the loop if required - you just don't call setTimeout when your loop termination condition is reached.
Better yet, you can wrap that all up in an immediately invoked function expression which creates the function, which then calls itself again as above, and automatically starts the loop:
(function foo() {
...
setTimeout(foo, delay);
})();
which defines the function and starts the cycle all in one go.
I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but you could easily do something like this:
setInterval(function hello() {
console.log('world');
return hello;
}(), 5000);
There's obviously any number of ways of doing this, but that's the most concise way I can think of.
I stumbled upon this question due to the same problem but none of the answers helps if you need to behave exactly like setInterval() but with the only difference that the function is called immediately at the beginning.
Here is my solution to this problem:
function setIntervalImmediately(func, interval) {
func();
return setInterval(func, interval);
}
The advantage of this solution:
existing code using setInterval can easily be adapted by substitution
works in strict mode
it works with existing named functions and closures
you can still use the return value and pass it to clearInterval() later
Example:
// create 1 second interval with immediate execution
var myInterval = setIntervalImmediately( _ => {
console.log('hello');
}, 1000);
// clear interval after 4.5 seconds
setTimeout( _ => {
clearInterval(myInterval);
}, 4500);
To be cheeky, if you really need to use setInterval then you could also replace the original setInterval. Hence, no change of code required when adding this before your existing code:
var setIntervalOrig = setInterval;
setInterval = function(func, interval) {
func();
return setIntervalOrig(func, interval);
}
Still, all advantages as listed above apply here but no substitution is necessary.
You could wrap setInterval() in a function that provides that behavior:
function instantGratification( fn, delay ) {
fn();
setInterval( fn, delay );
}
...then use it like this:
instantGratification( function() {
console.log( 'invoked' );
}, 3000);
Here's a wrapper to pretty-fy it if you need it:
(function() {
var originalSetInterval = window.setInterval;
window.setInterval = function(fn, delay, runImmediately) {
if(runImmediately) fn();
return originalSetInterval(fn, delay);
};
})();
Set the third argument of setInterval to true and it'll run for the first time immediately after calling setInterval:
setInterval(function() { console.log("hello world"); }, 5000, true);
Or omit the third argument and it will retain its original behaviour:
setInterval(function() { console.log("hello world"); }, 5000);
Some browsers support additional arguments for setInterval which this wrapper doesn't take into account; I think these are rarely used, but keep that in mind if you do need them.
Here's a simple version for novices without all the messing around. It just declares the function, calls it, then starts the interval. That's it.
//Declare your function here
function My_Function(){
console.log("foo");
}
//Call the function first
My_Function();
//Set the interval
var interval = window.setInterval( My_Function, 500 );
There's a convenient npm package called firstInterval (full disclosure, it's mine).
Many of the examples here don't include parameter handling, and changing default behaviors of setInterval in any large project is evil. From the docs:
This pattern
setInterval(callback, 1000, p1, p2);
callback(p1, p2);
is identical to
firstInterval(callback, 1000, p1, p2);
If you're old school in the browser and don't want the dependency, it's an easy cut-and-paste from the code.
I will suggest calling the functions in the following sequence
var _timer = setInterval(foo, delay, params);
foo(params)
You can also pass the _timer to the foo, if you want to clearInterval(_timer) on a certain condition
var _timer = setInterval(function() { foo(_timer, params) }, delay);
foo(_timer, params);
For someone needs to bring the outer this inside as if it's an arrow function.
(function f() {
this.emit("...");
setTimeout(f.bind(this), 1000);
}).bind(this)();
If the above producing garbage bothers you, you can make a closure instead.
(that => {
(function f() {
that.emit("...");
setTimeout(f, 1000);
})();
})(this);
Or maybe consider using the #autobind decorator depending on your code.
You can set a very small initial delay-time (e.g. 100) and set it to your desired delay-time within the function:
var delay = 100;
function foo() {
console.log("Change initial delay-time to what you want.");
delay = 12000;
setTimeout(foo, delay);
}
To solve this problem , I run the function a first time after the page has loaded.
function foo(){ ... }
window.onload = function() {
foo();
};
window.setInterval(function()
{
foo();
}, 5000);
This example builds on #Alnitak's answer, but uses await Promise for finer granularity of control within the loop cycle.
Compare examples:
let stillGoing = true;
(function foo() {
console.log('The quick brown fox did its thing');
if (stillGoing) setTimeout(foo, 5000);
})();
foo();
In the above example we call foo() and then it calls itself every 5 seconds.
But if, at some point in the future, we set stillGoing to false in order to stop the loop, we'll still get an extra log line even after we've issued the stop order. This is because at any given time, before we set stillGoing to false the current iteration will have already created a timeout to call the next iteration.
If we instead use await Promise as the delay mechanism then we have an opportunity to stop the loop before calling the next iteration:
let stillGoing = true;
(async function foo() {
console.log('The quick brown fox did its thing');
await new Promise(resolve => setTimeout(resolve, 5000));
if (stillGoing) foo();
})();
foo();
In the second example we start by setting a 5000ms delay, after which we check the stillGoing value and decide whether calling another recursion is appropriate.
So if we set stillGoing to false at any point, there won't be that one extra log line printed after we set the value.
The caveat is this requires the function to be async, which may or may not be an option for a given use.
For Those using React, here is how I solve this problem:
const intervalRef = useRef(0);
useEffect(() => {
if (condition is true){
if (intervalRef.current === 0) {
callMyFunction();
}
const interval = setInterval(() => {
callMyFunction();
}, 5_000);
intervalRef.current = interval;
} else {
clearInterval(intervalRef.current);
}
}, [deps]);
// YCombinator
function anonymous(fnc) {
return function() {
fnc.apply(fnc, arguments);
return fnc;
}
}
// Invoking the first time:
setInterval(anonymous(function() {
console.log("bar");
})(), 4000);
// Not invoking the first time:
setInterval(anonymous(function() {
console.log("foo");
}), 4000);
// Or simple:
setInterval(function() {
console.log("baz");
}, 4000);
Ok this is so complex, so, let me put it more simple:
function hello(status ) {
console.log('world', ++status.count);
return status;
}
setInterval(hello, 5 * 1000, hello({ count: 0 }));
If you can use RxJS, there is something called timer():
import { Subscription, timer } from 'rxjs';
const INITIAL_DELAY = 1;
const INTERVAL_DELAY = 10000;
const timerSubscription = timer(INITIAL_DELAY, INTERVAL_DELAY)
.subscribe(() => {
this.updateSomething();
});
// when destroying
timerSubscription.unsubscribe();
With ES2017, it may be preferable to avoid setInterval altogether.
The following solution has a much cleaner execution flow, prevents issues if the function takes longer than the desired time to complete, and allows for asynchronous operations.
const timeout = (delayMs) => new Promise((res, _rej) => setTimeout(res, delayMs));
const DELAY = 1_000;
(async () => {
while (true) {
let start_time = Date.now();
// insert code here...
let end_time = Date.now();
await timeout(DELAY - (end_time - start_time));
}
})();
There's a problem with immediate asynchronous call of your function, because standard setTimeout/setInterval has a minimal timeout about several milliseconds even if you directly set it to 0. It caused by a browser specific work.
An example of code with a REAL zero delay wich works in Chrome, Safari, Opera
function setZeroTimeout(callback) {
var channel = new MessageChannel();
channel.port1.onmessage = callback;
channel.port2.postMessage('');
}
You can find more information here
And after the first manual call you can create an interval with your function.
actually the quickest is to do
interval = setInterval(myFunction(),45000)
this will call myfunction, and then will do it agaian every 45 seconds which is different than doing
interval = setInterval(myfunction, 45000)
which won't call it, but schedule it only