We want to know if it is possible to have a function using jQuery to inspect a number of elements and, depending on the types assigned to them by one click, perform other functions. Basically, a function that would run forever, while the user does not refresh the page.
The idea is not to depend on events clicks to perform a function, but the classes assigned to a specific element.
For example:
$("td.gantt").each(function() {
if($(this).hasClass("oper")) {
//execute a serie of functions
}
if($(this).hasClass("preop")) {
//execute a serie of functions
}
});
The above is executed once, and we need to run all the time.
// define a function...
function ganttEach() {
$("td.gantt").each(function() {
// ...
});
}
// ...repeat it once every second
window.setInterval(ganttEach, 1000);
You can't "let it run all the time" (like, in a while(true) loop) because JavaScript is single-threaded and blocking the thread means your other code will never run. setInterval() makes sure there are necessary "gaps" for other code to execute.
setInterval() returns an ID that you can store in a variable and feed to clearInterval() at some point to make it stop again.
If you want to make sure that every new iteration of your function starts only after the previous one has really finished, use setTimeout() instead:
// define a self-repeating function...
function ganttEach() {
$("td.gantt").each(function() {
// ...
});
window.setTimeout(ganttEach, 1000); // calls itself again in one second
}
// ...initiate self-repeating function
ganttEach();
You should probably include some way to stop the endless repetition here as well, like introducing a flag that's checked before the setTimeout() call.
You can run your check every few milliseconds, say 50ms, using setInterval
window.setInterval (function () {
// do checks here
}, 50);
You might end up using a lot of CPU power if your checks are too frequent, or too complicated.
It is possible, with setInterval. My advice would be to select the element outside of the repeating function so as to minimize the overhead.
An infinite loop would lock the browser UI, as it is a single threaded environment. Set interval, however let you add actions to the UI stack which will be executed after a given period of time. You can specify this period in the second parameter of setInterval.
// select the element outside
// to minimize overhead
$gantt = $("td.gantt");
// define a repeating action
setInterval(function() {
$gantt.each(function() {
if($(this).hasClass("oper")) {
//execute a serie of functions
}
if($(this).hasClass("preop")) {
//execute a serie of functions
}
});
}, 100); // repeat interval: 100ms
I am not sure exactly what you are trying to do, but have you tried setInterval? It will keep running if that is what you really want.
window.setInterval(function () {
// add your jQuery here
}, 100);
Related
Since setTimeout crashes in while loops.
I don't know if there is a way to do it but I am trying to make one.
This is how it looks so far.
<script>
var send = true;
function sendit()
{
alert("test");
return true;
}
while(true)
{
if(send == true)
{
send = false;
setTimeout(function(){
if(sendit() == true) {
send = true;
}
}, 5000);
}
}
</script>
Is it possible this way?
You haven't explained what you want your code to do. If you want it to alert "test" every 5 seconds then you need this:
<script>
function sendit()
{
alert("test");
// Call sendit() the next time, repeating
setTimeout(sendit, 5000);
}
// Call sendit() the first time
setTimeout(sendit, 5000);
</script>
No need for a loop, just get the function to schedule itself again.
My understanding is that what you're trying to do is the equivalent of Thread.sleep(5000) in a language like Java or C#. That functionality does not exist in JavaScript. If you want to do something some amount of time after your function's execution, put it in a timeout, but one way or another, that first function will still complete in the same frame unless you're performing an enormous amount of work.
Currently, your code is setting a timeout on sendit() a practically-infinite number of times before it returns. Since JavaScript is single threaded, even if 20 seconds passed, it still wouldn't have finished your function and couldn't start looking up timeouts it needs to process. What you should be doing is something like having the inside of the timeout set another timeout, and remove the enclosing while(true). That could allow for infinite, periodic behavior as I think you're looking for.
I have written a custom animation function. It usually works just fine, but when I call animate(); in rapid succession with different endCallbacks, sometimes the callbacks overlap really badly, causing the wrong action at the wrong time.
The problem is that the function instantiates multiple times and executes untill the endValue is reached. The currentValue is changed so fast that I get to see just the last value in my html page animation. This hiddes this unwanted behavior.
What I need when I call animate(); a second time is to end the first instance of animate(); and trigger a new one with new values and a new callback. Also at the same time I want to stop the setTimeout() function just to make sure no wrong callback is triggered.
window.onload = function(){
document.addEventListener('click', // some button
function (){
animate(1, 10);
}, false
);
}
function animate(startValue, endValue, callback, endCallback) {
var startValue = startValue,
currentValue = startValue,
endValue = endValue,
callback = callback,
timeout = null;
loopAnimation();
function loopAnimation(){
if (currentValue != endValue){
timeout = setTimeout(function(){
currentValue++;
// Callback executes some page manipulation code
if (typeof callback !== "undefined") callback(currentValue);
console.log(currentValue);
loopAnimation();
},500)
} else {
console.log("This callback triggers some specific changes in my page");
if (typeof endCallback !== "undefined") endCallback();
}
}
}
Instead of seeing in the console:
1,2,3, - 1,4,2,5 ... 6,9,7,10,8,9,10
I'd like to see just:
1,2,3, - 1,2 ... 7,8,9,10
However, keep in mind that because of the way I use animate() in my script I can't relly on knowing the name or scope of the input variables. This cuts me from being able to solve it myself.
While it isn't quite the implementation you're asking for, I wonder if Underscore's throttle or debounce would meet the need?
debounce will make sure your function is called no more than X times per second -- it'll still be executed once per every time called, but the subsequent calls will be delayed to meet your rate limit. So if you called animate twice in quick succession, debounce can delay the second execution until 100ms after the first or what have you.
throttle will basically ignore calls that occur during the rate limit. So if you call your animate 10 times within 100ms, you could have it throw out all but the first. (Actually, it'll do the first one, plus one at at the end of the wait period).
You don't need to use all of underscore to get these methods; I've seen people frequently copy and pasting just the debounce and/or throttle functions from underscore. If you google, you can find some standalone throttle or debounce implementations.
Throttle and debounce are commonly used in just your case, animation.
For your original spec, to actually "end the first instance of animate()" -- there's no great reliable way to do that in javascript. There's no real general purpose way to 'cancel' a function already being executed. If you can make it work with debounce or throttle, I think it will lead to less frustration.
What you need is to store the last timeout id you used. So next time you start a new animation, you clear any ongoing animation using this timeout id and clearTimeout.
I found convenient to store the interval on the function itself.
See the jsbin here :
http://jsbin.com/nadawezete/1/edit?js,console,output
window.onload = function(){
document.addEventListener('click', // some button
function (){
animate(1, 10);
}, false
);
};
function animate(startValue, endValue, callback, endCallback) {
var currentValue = startValue;
if (animate.timeout) clearTimeout(animate.timeout);
loopAnimation();
function loopAnimation(){
if (currentValue != endValue){
animate.timeout = setTimeout(function(){
console.log(currentValue);
currentValue++;
// Callback executes some page manipulation code
if (callback ) callback(currentValue);
loopAnimation();
},500);
} else {
console.log("This callback triggers some specific changes in my page");
if (endCallback) endCallback();
}
}
}
I'm trying to find a way to stop a function at a certain point until something does not have a specific class anymore. I cannot change the place where this class is being assigned and removed because it's a plugin.
I was thinking of doing something like this
function DoSomething() {
while ($('div.divControl').hasClass('playing'))
{
//Wait here
}
};
Is this the correct way to go?
This will block so the element will never be changed, as no other code will execute.
What you need to use is an interval:
var interval = setInterval(DoSomething, 500);
function DoSomething() {
if ($('div.divControl').hasClass('playing'))
{
// Do something
clearInterval(interval);
}
};
This will execute the function every half second. The interval will be cancelled after the function succeeds.
No, that will just hang the browser as it goes into an infinite loop.
Your best bet (as best I can think at the moment anyhow) is to do a setTimeout on the function and have it check to see if it your div still has the class every quarter of a second or so.
Still, not nice at all =[
I'm creating a content rotator in jQuery. 5 items total. Item 1 fades in, pauses 10 seconds, fades out, then item 2 fades in. Repeat.
Simple enough. Using setTimeout I can call a set of functions that create a loop and will repeat the process indefinitely.
I now want to add the ability to interrupt this rotator at any time by clicking on a navigation element to jump directly to one of the content items.
I originally started going down the path of pinging a variable constantly (say every half second) that would check to see if a navigation element was clicked and, if so, abandon the loop, then restart the loop based on the item that was clicked.
The challenge I ran into was how to actually ping a variable via a timer. The solution is to dive into JavaScript closures...which are a little over my head but definitely something I need to delve into more.
However, in the process of that, I came up with an alternative option that actually seems to be better performance-wise (theoretically, at least). I have a sample running here:
http://jsbin.com/uxupi/14
(It's using console.log so have fireBug running)
Sample script:
$(document).ready(function(){
var loopCount = 0;
$('p#hello').click(function(){
loopCount++;
doThatThing(loopCount);
})
function doThatOtherThing(currentLoopCount) {
console.log('doThatOtherThing-'+currentLoopCount);
if(currentLoopCount==loopCount){
setTimeout(function(){doThatThing(currentLoopCount)},5000)
}
}
function doThatThing(currentLoopCount) {
console.log('doThatThing-'+currentLoopCount);
if(currentLoopCount==loopCount){
setTimeout(function(){doThatOtherThing(currentLoopCount)},5000);
}
}
})
The logic being that every click of the trigger element will kick off the loop passing into itself a variable equal to the current value of the global variable. That variable gets passed back and forth between the functions in the loop.
Each click of the trigger also increments the global variable so that subsequent calls of the loop have a unique local variable.
Then, within the loop, before the next step of each loop is called, it checks to see if the variable it has still matches the global variable. If not, it knows that a new loop has already been activated so it just ends the existing loop.
Thoughts on this? Valid solution? Better options? Caveats? Dangers?
UPDATE:
I'm using John's suggestion below via the clearTimeout option.
However, I can't quite get it to work. The logic is as such:
var slideNumber = 0;
var timeout = null;
function startLoop(slideNumber) {
//... code is here to do stuff here to set up the slide based on slideNumber...
slideFadeIn()
}
function continueCheck() {
if (timeout != null) {
// cancel the scheduled task.
clearTimeout(timeout);
timeout = null;
return false;
} else {
return true;
}
};
function slideFadeIn() {
if (continueCheck){
// a new loop hasn't been called yet so proceed...
$mySlide.fadeIn(fade, function() {
timeout = setTimeout(slideFadeOut,display);
});
}
};
function slideFadeOut() {
if (continueCheck){
// a new loop hasn't been called yet so proceed...
slideNumber=slideNumber+1;
$mySlide.fadeOut(fade, function() {
//... code is here to check if I'm on the last slide and reset to #1...
timeout = setTimeout(function(){startLoop(slideNumber)},100);
});
}
};
startLoop(slideNumber);
The above kicks of the looping.
I then have navigation items that, when clicked, I want the above loop to stop, then restart with a new beginning slide:
$(myNav).click(function(){
clearTimeout(timeout);
timeout = null;
startLoop(thisItem);
})
If I comment out 'startLoop...' from the click event, it, indeed, stops the initial loop. However, if I leave that last line in, it doesn't actually stop the initial loop. Why? What happens is that both loops seem to run in parallel for a period.
So, when I click my navigation, clearTimeout is called, which clears it.
What you should do is save the handle returned by setTimeout and clear it with clearTimeout to interrupt the rotator.
var timeout = null;
function doThatThing() {
/* Do that thing. */
// Schedule next call.
timeout = setTimeout(doThatOtherThing, 5000);
}
function doThatOtherThing() {
/* Do that other thing. */
// Schedule next call.
timeout = setTimeout(doThatThing, 5000);
}
function interruptThings() {
if (timeout != null) {
// Never mind, cancel the scheduled task.
clearTimeout(timeout);
timeout = null;
}
}
When a navigation element is clicked simply call interruptThings(). The nice part is that it will take effect immediately and you don't need to do any polling or anything else complicated.
I have a piece of Javascript that checks for a condition (via an AJAX call) every n seconds. If that condition is true, it stops checking. I have implemented it in the following way:
var stopTimer;
var timerId = setInterval(function() {
/* Make Ajax Calls and set stopTimer */
if (stopTimer) {
clearInterval(timerId);
}
}, 10000);
However, I find erratic behaviour: Works sometimes, but at other times, it keeps checking forever. I have checked that (as much as is possible) there is no error in any part of the code.
I am therefore suspecting that calling clearInterval inside a setInterval handler might be the culprit. Is that right? Is it OK to call clearInterval inside a setInterval handler?
Thank you for your attention
It's safe. The issue is probably to do with stopTimer not being set as you expect.
I don't think there will be any issue with your code unless the AJAX function is erroneous. You have to take care of the success and error callbacks of the AJAX function so that there won't be any issue with the loop not being stopped.
Also I think you are constantly polling the server for a response and then doing the appropriate action. You can use Reverse AJAX to do this kind of process.
Make sure you're not inadvertently re-using the same timer name elsewhere in your code which would result in you always stopping the second timer to be defined.
Either give the timer a unique name, or scope it to a function
var timerForAjax = setInterval(function() {
/* Make Ajax Calls and set stopTimer */
if (stopTimer)
{
clearInterval(timerForAjax);
}
}, 10000);
I was careless enough to call my timer interval and didn't realize I was creating two timers in the same scope both called interval. Blamed iOS8 for about an hour until I realized that that was nothing to do with it.