I have a set of classes named class1 up to classN, and I want each class classK to get the color rgb(k%256, 0, 0).
N in this case is dynamic and has no theoretical upper limit, as the elements with these class names are generated based on user input and some js code.
I was thinking of having CSS kind of like this:
class[k]{
color: rgb(k%256, 0, 0);
}
However, I have found no way of making CSS rules that vary based on a variable in the class name.
I briefly explored trying to use CSS variables, but those are more like constants and can't accommodate all classes 1 to N simultaneously.
Alternatively I could use javascript for the styling and have something like:
for(let i = 0; i < N; i++){
document.getElementByClassName(`class${k}`).forEach(e => e.style = `color: rgb(${k}, 0, 0)`);
}
However, this is not very scaleable if I want to add more complex CSS (which I most likely will, the rgb value I'm using now is proof of concept), it is very inefficient and I much prefer having CSS handle as much of my styling as possible.
Looking around on the internet I did find this post on stackoverflow that asks pretty much the same question, and received an answer of "this is impossible". However, that post was barely viewed and from 2015, so there might be a new feature since then that could help me.
Related
We have a corporate content management system that allows for rich text editing/html markup, but does not allow for head elements or style sheets to be uploaded, attached, or used in any way. It provides some rich text editing controls and also access to the source html, but just for the html fragment -- there is no head, no body. We also have no access the whole system that presents these bits of markup on the page. The only way to style the content is through inline style attributes on the elements. It is best, it isn't pretty, but that is what we have and I'm trying to make the best of a bad situation.
We also have high standards for visual presentation and would like to be able to quickly produce and modify/update content and keep it looking nice. It is difficult to correctly apply formatting using the system. For anybody who has tried to markup anything more than a paragraph or two with an RTE, you probably know what I mean. It seems like we should have a different system, but has anybody worked for a large company before? Just sayin.
We do have access to another location where we could "author" and "store" actual styled content and then "compile it" for copypasta into the other system. In other words, we could author/design using css and best practices and then we could run some code that could convert those element, class, and id formatting into inline styles.
I did my research and found this thread which also lead me to this code.
These both are very helpful in exploring solutions, but I've run into an issue. These solutions use the javascript getComputedStyle() method. There are some other options for properties to only look at other properties or to be recursive on the children of the element provide, but basically it boils down to this. (Since getComputeStyle returns an object and not an array, there is also a prototype/polyfill to allow iterating over an object with forEach, but none of that is part of the issue I'm facing.)
const computedStyle = getComputedStyle(element);
computedStyle.forEach(property => {
element.style[property] = computedStyle.getPropertyValue(property);
});
This works well for css attributes like font-size:24px or margin:0 15px. The issue I'm running into are when I'm using units other than px. For example, if I'm trying to make something that has width:50%. getComputedStyle() converts the 50% to the actual number of pixels that 50% is currently using.
In the notes section of the MDN web docs I see that this is expected behavior. Although I'm not quite clear on what that last line means.
...An example difference between pre- and post-layout values includes the
resolution of percentages for width or height, as those will be
replaced by their pixel equivalent only for used values.
So what I'm trying to do is convert something like this
.container{width:50%;}
<div class="container">
into something like this
<div class="container" style="width:50%">
Does anyone know of a way to complete this type of transformation?
PS: If it matters we'll be using the more basic attributes in our css -- no transitions, grid, prefixing, etc. We still need to support IE 11 -- if that tells you anything. We won't need to account for every edge case or browser. Just some basic stuff so that all our H1 look the same.
Couldn't find any way to do this using the built in getComputedStyle(). It also returned too many properties that I wasn't interested in. So I came up with a different approach. Basically to use the same function to loop through an element (and maybe all its children elements) and the use Element.matches() to get all the css rules that apply to the element and apply the properties as they were specified in the stylesheet.
I modified this answer a bit to get the rules from the stylesheet.
Has the added benefit that we can pull either from all the document stylesheets or just from a specific one that is needed for preparing the code to go into our content management systems's rich text editor.
function applyInline(element, recursive = true) {
if (!element) {
throw new Error("No element specified.");
}
const matches = matchRules(element);
// we need to preserve any pre-existing inline styles.
var srcRules = document.createElement(element.tagName).style;
srcRules.cssText = element.style.cssText;
matches.forEach(rule => {
for (var prop of rule.style) {
let val = srcRules.getPropertyValue(prop) || rule.style.getPropertyValue(prop);
let priority = rule.style.getPropertyPriority(prop);
element.style.setProperty(prop,val,priority);
}
});
if (recursive) {
element.children.forEach(child => {
applyInline(child, recursive);
});
}
}
function matchRules(el, sheets) {
sheets = sheets || document.styleSheets;
var ret = [];
for (var i in sheets) {
if (sheets.hasOwnProperty(i)) {
var rules = sheets[i].rules || sheets[i].cssRules;
for (var r in rules) {
if (el.matches(rules[r].selectorText)) {
ret.push(rules[r]);
}
}
}
}
return ret;
}
Recently I have been working with css3 and its animations. I use the following code at one point:
$(".container").css('-webkit-transform', 'translate(200px,200px)');
Now most of you are wondering why I dont just use a class to do above and toggle it.
Well the thing is I do some calculations and then obtain the 200px,200px , so I will replace the 200px,200px with a variable (I used 200px,200px as example)
Any ideas on what I can do
If I'm understanding your question, you want to use variables for the translation outlined in the above code. If you have variables like:
var x = 200, y = 200;
You should be able to insert them into the translation string by cutting it up and catenating them together. It might look like:
$(".container").css('-webkit-transform', 'translate('+x+'px,'+y+'px)');
Suppose I have to write a javascript function:
function(){
var a=1;
var sum=1;
for(var i=0;i<6;i++){
sum=sum+a+1;
}
console.log(sum);
}
Someone recommended me to write this function like this:
function () {
var a = 1;
var sum = 1;
for (var i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
var sum = sum + a +1;
}
console.log(sum);
}
With more blank space, I know this rule, but I don't how it works, or what can I benefit from it?
It is a matter of opinion what good style is, but in a general sense picking some style and consistently following it throughout your code makes it easier to read (both for other people and for you when you come back to it later).
In my experience most people find code easier to read with the extra spaces as shown in your second example.
I don't like putting a space between function and (). Or, where there is a function name I don't put a space between the name and the parentheses: function someName().
Note also that with modern code editors that have syntax highlighting (like Stack Overflow does) it is much easier than it used to be to read code that doesn't have spaces. Compare the following two:
for(var i=0;i<6;i++)
for(var i=0;i<6;i++)
Reading and editing the latter, all in black and white, really annoys me, but I don't mind the coloured version anywhere near as much. I still prefer it with the extra spaces though.
I'd make some other changes in your function:
function() {
var a = 1,
sum = 1,
i;
for(i = 0; i < 6; i++){
sum += a + 1;
}
console.log(sum);
}
The benefit of coding style is enhanced readability. It does not really matter what style you decide to stick to, as long as you DO stick with a uniform style, and can agree with your coworkers on its readability, which is not always easy.
These coding conventions are for humans, they increase readability. Suppose I have written an expression like this:
x=(a*b/2)+m-n+c*(d/e);
It looks clumsy and difficult to read. It would have been easier to understand if we had used spaces around operators like this:
x = (a * b / 2) + m - n + c * (d / e);
Again using blank line increases readability by denoting sections. For example:
function foo() {
var a;
var b;
// a blank line here to specify the end of variable declarations
if (some_cond) {
} else if (another_cond) {
}
// another blank line to specify end of some logic
//more codes here;
}
If you do not follow these guidelines and all team members do not agree in some convention then it will be very difficult to maintain a big project for long time.
Finally note that, the conventions are not for compilers, they are for humans. That's why it is called coding guidelines, not language syntax.
May be you should read more about javascript closure, and you can follow "Google Javascript Style Guide".
Following some uniform style guidelines when coding makes code easier to read and helps you writing beautiful code, and others understanding (and loving!) your code.
For sure there are loads of resources on the net (just by googling for a while you get some javascript guides or guidelines), but this one is quite easy, simple and complete:
http://javascript.crockford.com/code.html
It's not a rule. It's just coding convention style. You don't need to follow if you don't want. But this style can make your code more readable, easier to maintain, and cleaner. To me, I prefer to have space rather than narrow letters. Again, it's not a rule.
Coding style is always very personal; one person likes condensed code so that they can see as much as possible on one screen, another needs the opening and closing braces on a separate line, etc.
When only coding for yourself, you should choose whatever is best for you. But when you start working in teams and others have to maintain your code and visa versa, it becomes important to agree on one coding style ... and this can be hard.
I've sat in coding style discussions and they're very uncomfortable, because you're giving up some of your personal preferences albeit for the greater good. After a brief moment of discomfort you will get used to it ;-)
The second version isn't equivalent to the first, as it declares an inner 'sum' variable, unless Javascript doesn't do what it says on the tin with that.
The extra blank lines don't contribute anything much IMHO, but I probably wouldn't die in a ditch about them. However an equally valid concern is download speed, which is made worse by the suggestion.
I've got this page I'm doing some tests in Javascript and jQuery: JS Tests
I've got a few questions on how to create, not sure if this is right term, but compound controls via Javascript. In something like Flash, you'd create the Object class, have the getters and setters, draw your images, etc. In JS, it seems to be a very different thought process. My main question is How do you create multiple elements with getters and setters to be rendered, filtered, and interacted with in Javascript?
The main code regarding this example sits with:
var html = (function(){
// var FRAG = $(document.createDocumentFragment());
htmlBox = $(document.createElement("div"));
var eTitle = $(document.createElement("h4"));
var ePrice = $(document.createElement("p"));
// set class first
htmlBox.addClass("box")
htmlBox.css({
backgroundColor : color
})
// set text values
eTitle.text(title);
ePrice.text("$" + price);
htmlBox.append(eTitle)
htmlBox.append(ePrice)
return htmlBox;
})();
... inside the Box() class. If someone could take a look at the source and let me know what isn't quite right, that'd be great.
EDIT
Here's the final result for this example. Some logistics to work out, but what I'm after.
http://geerswitch.in/tests/obj/
As for the jQuery creating nodes, the built in JS version works fine for this, and some research on Google shows that the non-jquery way is faster in most cases anyway (and looks worse, imo)
You're doing it almost right. You've created a Box class to represent your higher-order UI element, you're instantiating it for each element, and your main program is manipulating the elements through its interface. The only thing you're missing is the split between the public interface and the private implementation. There's nothing to prevent me from doing myBox.price += 10 right now, even though the Box interface clearly implies that price should be set at construction and never modified.
JavaScript doesn't have visibility modifiers like "private" and "public", but you can create the same effect yourself. Check out Douglas Crockford's explanation for the details. Crockford is an opinionated genius when it comes to JavaScript, and he's the brains behind JSLint and JSON.
Is there a way to assign attributes in a more compact manner
I dont really want to use setAttribute as it seems to be buggy in ie8
This list is for all attributes so its quite long
else if(a=="textalign")
{
e.style.textAlign="";
e.align=v
}
if(a=="textalign")
{
e.style.textAlign="";
e.align=v
}
I don't know why you are trying to set alignment via an HTML attribute rather than just using the CSS... this is much less reliable as there are many elements which have no align attribute. HTML align is also deprecated and should be avoided in general.
You don't say what the “other attributes” are that you might want to set. If you are talking specifically about HTML attribute properties it's easy to set them by a name in a string:
e[a]= v;
But then you need a to be the HTML attribute property name, which would be ‘align’ not ‘textalign’. It wouldn't do anything special to try to workaround CSS overrides like textAlign, because there is no automated way to do that, and the interaction between the deprecated HTML styling attributes and CSS is ill-defined. Stick to attributes or CSS (CSS is highly preferable); don't use both.
If you are talking about setting any CSS style property, as I might guess from the name being ‘textalign’, that's done similarly:
e.style[a]= v;
But then, again, you'd want to be using the exact style property name ‘textAlign’ not ‘textalign’.
If you want to set CSS style properties by their CSS name, like ‘text-align’, you could transform that to the DOM name automatically:
// convert foo-bar-baz to fooBarBaz
//
var doma= a.replace(/-([a-z])/g, function(m, g) {
return g.toUpperCase();
});
e.style[a]= v;
If you really do need to use case-lossy names like ‘textalign’ you'd have to use a lookup of all property names you wanted to use to get the case back:
var propernames= ['textAlign', 'borderColor', 'paddingTop']; // etc
for (var i= propernames.length; i-->0;)
if (propernames[i].toLowerCase()===a)
a= propernames[i];
e.style[a]= v;
Forget setAttribute. It has nothing to do with style properties (it's a bug in IE6-7 that it even works on styles there), and you shouldn't use it on elements either for HTML documents, as there are other IE6-7 bugs to contend with there. Stick to the ‘DOM Level 2 HTML’ direct property access stuff, which is more reliable and easier to read.
Use a class instead of giving all the attribute values.
.testClass
{
// set all attribute values here
}
e.className = "test";
See
element.className
Use some framework such as JQuery, it takes care of all of your browser incompatibility issues. In JQuery you use the .css('attributeName', 'value')method.
jQuery would make that easy with .attr({attr1: val, attr2: val}) etc. It would also shield you from many cross-browser compatibility bugs.