Develop Reference

javascript callback - how to use call backs

I need help with this JS callback function. I am trying to figure out how exactly callbacks work in JS.
--quick test code follows:
function debFilter(deb_array, fillCb){
var filt_darr = [];
for (var inx in deb_array) {
filt_darr.push(fillCb(deb_array[inx]));
}
return filt_darr;
}
console.log(debFilter(savedInp, function(x) { if (x%2 == 0) { return x;}} ));
Let's say my savedInp array contains [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9] something like this. How do I make sure my callback returns only the even elements and not the odd ones? so my filt_darr would be [2,4,6...etc].
With the above test code I am getting [2,undefined,4,undefined,..etc]. I have tried with other similar conditions too with no avail. I just need to know how to tell JS not to 'push/return' something I dont need. Sorry if this is a beginner Q.
Thanks for the help.

Iterate the array and then push evens into a new array:
var a = [1,2,3,4,5];
function getEvens(originalArray){
var evens = [];
for(var i = 0; i < originalArray.length; ++i){
if(originalArray[i] % 2 === 0){
evens.push(originalArray[i]);
}
}
return evens;
}

As you probably noticed, you are collecting every return value into your result array and your callback returns undefined for every odd.
You could change your code to sth like
function debFilter(deb_array, fillCb){
'use strict';
var filt_darr = [],
len = deb_array.length;
for (var i = 0; i < len; i++) {
if (fillCb(deb_array[i])) {
filt_darr.push(deb_array[i]);
}
}
return filt_darr;
}
By the way, ES 5 supports Array.prototype.filter which might be what you are looking for. There is also a polyfill that you can take some inspiration from.

How to avoid using filter twice against the same set of elements

I'm trying to separate two types of inputs into their own jQuery wrapped sets as they need to be processed differently depending on whether the id contain '-add-new-' or not. I know I could do this using filter twice as follows:
var seriesTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input').filter(function() {
return $(this).attr('id').indexOf('-add-new-') == -1;
});
var addNewTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input').filter(function() {
return $(this).attr('id').indexOf('-add-new-') >= 0;
});
However filtering twice seems inefficient to me as I know it will require a second loop. Is there a way to avoid this?

Try like below:
var addNewTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input[id*="-add-new-"]');
var seriesTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input[id]:not([id*="-add-new-"])');
OR
var addNewTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input[id*="-add-new-"]');
var seriesTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input[id]').not(addNewTabInputs);

Just to offer an alternative to using specific selectors, you could iterate through the jQuery set and build the two collections as you go. I don't know that this would be any faster due to the different operations applied to the collections.
var $inputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input');
var seriesTabInputs = [];
var addNewTabInputs = [];
for (var i = 0; i < $inputs.length ; i += 1)
{
var input = $($inputs[i]);
if ( $(input).attr('id').indexOf('-add-new-') >= 0 )
{ addNewTabInputs.push(input); }
else
{ seriesTabInputs.push(input); }
}
seriesTabInputs = $(seriesTabInputs);
addNewTabInputs = $(addNewTabInputs);

Avoiding filtering twice may not be so crucial unless you are dealing with an enormous amount of elements. Furthermore there is something to be said for the consistency of the code when you filter twice.
That being said there is a way to avoid filtering twice and it may even be instructional; below is some code that can be used to achieve this.
First, we create an empty wrapped set that can be added to, this is achieved by var seriesTabInputs = $(false); Please see this write-up for more information.
Then inside of the filter, we conditionally add to seriesTabInputs but note the way in which we do it: we continually re-assign with seriesTabInputs = seriesTabInputs.add($(this)); If instead you merely call seriesTabInputs.add($(this)) without assigning to seriesTabInput you will wind up with an empty array in the end. Please see the jQuery docs for .add() which gives a similar incorrect example and states that such usage "will not save the added elements, because the .add() method creates a new set".
var seriesTabInputs = $(false);
var addNewTabInputs = $msSeriesTabs.find('input').filter(function() {
if ($(this).attr('id').indexOf('-add-new') >= 0) {
return true;
}
else {
seriesTabInputs = seriesTabInputs.add($(this));
}
});

Changing a class with z-index

I'm still in the process of learning JavaScript. and I would like to complete the task using only JavaScript and no Jquery.
I have multiple div/images that I’m trying to manipulate using the z-index, and a button that randomize the images to come to the front.
I got the random image array to work but as you could see in image[1]…setting each changeZ index will be laborious. So I’m embarking on changing the class’s (as seen in image[0] so I could add current to the new image and send current to the background on the next go around and then removing the class attribute. I have got the element to work separate but having trouble putting it together in a array.
function changeZIndex(i,id) {
document.getElementById(id).style.zIndex=i;};
function changeClassZIndex(i,tagName){
document.getElementsByTagName("*").style.zIndex=i;};
function getImage(){
var whichImage=Math.floor(Math.random()*3);
var image=new Array()
var currentPhoto = div.current
image[0]=function() {
changeZIndex(5,"scene1");
changeClassZIndex(-5,"current");
currentPhoto.removeClass('current')
document.getElementById("scene1").className += "current"; };
image[1]=function() {
changeZIndex(5,"scene2");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene1");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene3");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene");
};
image[2]=function() {
changeZIndex(5,"scene3");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene2");
changeZIndex(-5,"scene1");
};
image[whichImage].apply(undefined);};

It's because document.getElementsByTagName() returns an array of elements, which you can't do operations like that on. Instead, you need to enumerate through them and do the operations individually.
Here's a working jsfiddle which shows exactly how to do it: jsfiddle
As a side note: if there's one thing a lot of web programming will teach you, its this:
Dont ever, ever, rule out jQuery as an option.
JQuery is your best friend, and the use of it in this situation would cut down your lines of code by well over half.

Firstly, I believe your problem is probably in changeClassZIndex(i,tagName)
which should probably look something like this:
if (document.getElementsByClassName == undefined) {
document.getElementsByClassName = function(className)
{
var hasClassName = new RegExp("(?:^|\\s)" + className + "(?:$|\\s)");
var allElements = document.getElementsByTagName("*");
var results = [];
var element;
for (var i = 0; (element = allElements[i]) != null; i++) {
var elementClass = element.className;
if (elementClass && elementClass.indexOf(className) != -1 && hasClassName.test(elementClass))
results.push(element);
}
return results;
}
}
function changeClassZIndex(z,className) {
var e = document.getElementsByClassName(className);
for(var i = 0; i < e.length; i++) {
e[i].style.zIndex = z;
}
};
I am defining the getElementsByClassName function if it does not exist because some browsers may not support it.
I may suggest taking a different approach to your problem however:
var images = new Array("scene1", "scene2", "scene3");
var currentPhoto = div.current
var whichImage = Math.floor(Math.random()*images.length);
// change all images to the background
for(var i = 0; i < images.length; i++)
{
changeZIndex(-5, images[i]);
}
// change the one you want to the top
changeZIndex(5, images[whichImage]);
That way you do not have to write functions for each image, and adding images is as easy as adding to the array.

Avoiding having to write the same word over and over again

I'm very new to javascript so this question might sound stupid. But what is the correct syntax of replacing certain words inside variables and functions. For example, I have this function:
function posTelegram(p){
var data = telegramData;
$("#hotspotTelegram").css("left", xposTelegram[p] +"px");
if (p < data[0] || p > data[1]) {
$("#hotspotTelegram").hide()
} else {
$("#hotspotTelegram").show()
}
};
There is the word "telegram" repeating a lot and every time I make a new hotspot I'm manually inserting the word to replace "telegram" in each line. What would be a smarter way of writing that code so that I only need to write "telegram" once?

Group similar / related data in to data structures instead of having a variable for each bit.
Cache results of calling jQuery
Use an argument
function posGeneral(p, word){
// Don't have a variable for each of these, make them properties of an object
var data = generalDataThing[word].data;
// Don't search the DOM for the same thing over and over, use a variable
var hotspot = $("#hotspot" + word);
hotspot.css("left", generalDataThing[word].xpos[p] +"px");
if (p < data[0] || p > data[1]) {
hotspot.hide()
} else {
hotspot.show()
}
};

You can't always avoid this kind of repetition (this is general to all programing languages).
Sometimes, you can make generic functions or generic classes, for example a class which would embed all your data :
Thing = function(key, xpos) {
this.$element = $('#hotspot'+key);
this.xpos = xpos;
};
Thing.prototype.pos = function (p, data) {
this.$element.css("left", this.xpos[p] +"px");
if (p < this.data[0] || p > this.data[1]) {
this.$element.hide()
} else {
this.$element.show()
}
};
And we could imagine that this could be called like this :
var telegramThing = new Thing('telegram', xposTelegram);
...
telegramThing.pos(p, data);
But it's really hard to make a more concrete proposition without more information regarding your exact problem.
I recommend you read a little about OOP and javascript, as it may help you make complex programs more clear, simple, and easier to maintain.
For example, using a Thing class here would enable
not defining more than once the "#hotspotTelegram" string in your code
reusing the logic and avoid making the same code with another thing than "telegram"
not having the Thing logic in your main application logic (usually in another Thing.js file)
But don't abstract too much, it would have the opposite effects. And if you don't use objects, try to keep meaningful variable names.

var t = "Telegram";
var $_tg = $('#hotspotTelegram');
$_tg.css("left", "xpos"+t[p] + "px"); // not sure about this line, lol
$_tg.hide();
$_tg.show();
etc.

you can create a selector as variable, something like this
function posTelegram(p){
var data = telegramData;
var $sel = $("#hotspotTelegram");
$sel.css("left", xposTelegram[p] +"px");
if (p < data[0] || p > data[1]) {
$sel.hide()
} else {
$sel.show()
}
};

Custom for-loop helper for EmberJS/HandlebarsJS

A small two hours ago I started: Nested HandlebarsJS #each helpers with EmberJS not working
Shortly after I figured an acceptable temporary solution myself, question is still unaswered. My problems didn't stop there though.
I am now trying to make a custom helper which will loop through an array of objects, but exclude the first index - pretty much: for(i = 1; i < length; i++) {}. I've read on websites you have to get the length of your context and pass it to options - considering your function looks like: forLoop(context, options).
However, context is a string rather than an actual object. When you do a .length, you will get the length of the string, rather than the size of the array. When I pass that to options, nothing happens - not too mention browser freezes.
I then first tried to do a getPath before passing it to options, this returns an empty string.
What am I supposed to do instead, I made the for-loop code before for just HandlebarsJS and that worked, but EmberJS doesn't seem to take it, why?
EDIT: I pretty much also followed: http://handlebarsjs.com/block_helpers.html -> Simple Iterators

I solved this myself after trying for a long time.
The HandlebarsJS method (as described on the site) is no longer valid for EmberJS, it's now as follows:
function forLoop(context, options) {
var object = Ember.getPath(options.contexts[0], context);
var startIndex = options.hash.start || 0;
for(i = startIndex; i < object.length; i++) {
options(object[i]);
}
}
Heck, you could even extend the for-loop to include an index-value!
function forLoop(context, options) {
var object = Ember.getPath(options.contexts[0], context);
var startIndex = options.hash.start || 0;
for(i = startIndex; i < object.length; i++) {
object[i].index = i;
options(object[i]);
}
}
This is a working for-loop with variable start index. You use it in your templates like so:
{{#for anArray start=1}}
<p>Item #{{unbound index}}</p>
{{/for}}

Here is how I did it (and it works !!!)
First,
i had in my model a 'preview' property/function, that just return the arrayController in an array :
objectToLoop = Ember.Object.extend({
...
arrayController: [],
preview: function() {
return this.get('arrayController').toArray();
}.property('arrayController.#each'),
...
});
Then, I add a new Handlebars helper :
Handlebars.registerHelper("for", function forLoop(arrayToLoop, options) {
var data = Ember.Handlebars.get(this, arrayToLoop, options.fn);
if (data.length == 0) {
return 'Chargement...';
}
filtered = data.slice(options.hash.start || 0, options.hash.end || data.length);
var ret = "";
for(var i=0; i< filtered.length; i++) {
ret = ret + options.fn(filtered[i]);
}
return ret;
});
And thanks to all this magic, I can then call it in my view :
<script type="text/x-handlebars">
<ul>
{{#bind objectToLoop.preview}}
{{#for this end=4}}
<li>{{{someProperty}}}</li>
{{/for}}
{{/bind}}
</ul>
</script>
And that's it.
I know it is not optimal, so whoever have an idea on how to improve it, PLEASE, make me know :)