I am working on a intra-net project, which uses javascript for client side effects/widgets, like tree, grid, dragging. We are thinking about to use jquery/backbone plus some jquery ui.
The problem is, with great flexibility of jquery/backbone, our low experienced developers are almost certained to make code MESSY. And I hate that.
To reduce the chance they can make code messy, I am going to build a server-side program to parse xml (those developer will write xml instead of javascript when possible) and generate javascript at runtime. By doing this, I can force restriction on the xml. And xml tends to be less messy.
But before jumping into that, I want to ask is there any similar existing framework? Preferably the javascript generated also make use of model/view/controller pattern.
Or what else can I do to prevent the project from being messy?
ps: I want to educate the developer. But that is a long term job. Not really helpful for current project.
Thank you guys/girls.
Alright, a terrible idea I think. So besides training my developers (for long term), what else can I do? Especially in short term because the project is rolling on?
I like your goal but I think that trying to enforce coding standards in a programmatic way is over-solutionising the problem. The following steps help to steer you in the right direction though:
Use a version control system such as SVN or Git. Not only does this allow you to pinpoint who is messing up your code and educate them, but it gives you the option to roll back changes that completely break your project. It shouldn't be seen as a "blaming" mechanism, but is certainly a reliable way to identify the culprit. You may also find that your developers are less likely to commit code that isn't up to scratch after they realise their work is open to such scrutiny.
Documentation - and I don't necessarily mean having a 300 page wiki on how your project is organised and how functions should be written. But even something as simple as commenting every function will often encourage others to do the same. The important thing is that the developer sees the standard of work they are expected to deliver in your work. Developers with potential will take their cues from you.
Paired programming - get into the habit of sitting with your developers while they code. Not 100% of the time, but often enough that you are aware of their strengths and weaknesses. Teach them the way you want them to code.
If all else fails, resort to tools that help developers with their standards, such as the Resharper plugin for Visual Studio. While this is primarily designed for C# usage, it also provides code hints etc. for Javascript that will help inexperienced developers adopt a set of practices that should improve the readability of their code.
I don't think there is any substitute for a good tutor, and providing any sort of automated solution is likely to cause a lot of headaches for you without ever really improving the skills of those you are hoping to teach.
Related
I have completed codeacademy twice, freecodecamp twice and read a few online articles...I believe I now have a good understanding of the fundamentals of Javascript.
However, I feel lost in terms of where to go next. People say build projects, but where do I start? How do I plan? Even though I know the fundamentals of Javascript, I still feel there is a lot to learn. I feel like I will only truly start understanding Javascript once I start putting projects together but I cant think of any.
Also, codeacademy, freecodecamp and these other online course websites dont seem to really teach DOM manipulation. Is there any online coding sites, similar to the ones mentioned, which will allow me to practice DOM manipulation?
I would be hufely grateful if people who have developed their understanding in Javascript can give me some advice based on how they did it.
I am just sitting here staring at my laptop and going back and forth. I cant really seem to figure out what to do next, now that I have gained a basic understanding of the core concepts of Javascript. Please guys, help!
This is not a very good question, but I still would like to try and explain.
Questions you need to ask yourself
Frontend or backend js?
I assume frontend based on the "DOM manipulation" part, but there is also Node.js for the backend with it's own unique API to use and interact with the operating system.
Do I want to use libraries and/or frameworks
Depending on your needs and preferences you will come in touch with these things, they all have their own learning curve, on top of learning js. Libraries are mostly just function in order to help you. However frameworks like Vue and Angular require a way of writing your code that is like it's own language. (opinionated)
What version(s) of js and browsers do you want to support?
Javascript has evolved over time and the javascript engines in browsers as well. Older IE browsers will be harder to support without the help of a library like jQuery.
Now about the learning part and where you can practice.
There are probably thousands of great sites to practice, however I will give you my favorites.
The stackoverflow documentation on javascript (top navigation on this page)
I will get hate for this: W3Schools
To read the docs on Mozilla
interactive on both codeschool and codeacademy
JSFiddle for practicing in a closed environment
https://bento.io/topic/javascript
https://learnxinyminutes.com/docs/javascript/
http://www.allitebooks.com/ for specific ebooks
Have a look at what frameworks are popular nowadays and why. If they suit your needs. Learn them one or two at a time but not more, so you won't mix them all up in the end. Try to at least understand OOP in javascript even if you don't intend to use it later. Anyone feel free to expand this answer because it is hard to cover it all myself.
I am new to computer programming and have some experience programming with python. I am thinking of developing a program that does physics simulations (projectiles, circular motion, damped simple harmonic motion systems etc.) as a hobby project. I would like to write the program that it could be run by a non-technical user(my fellow students) on a variety of platforms (mac, windows etc.) without any setup and python doesn’t seem to be a good option for building such a program so I am looking for an alternative. JavaScript has caught my attention, as it seems to be quite powerful on modern browsers, especially in conjunction with HTML5. I would like to know whether it is suitable to use JavaScript for this type application, and some information as to where I should start (I have no JavaScript knowledge)
Thanks in advance!
Yes I did have a look at the similar threads on the site but I want write something by myself than using a 3rd party library (other than for the frontend, if possible) :)
What is actually your question? :)
Can you write a physics simulation in Python?
Yes, of course.
Can you write a physics simulation in Javascript?
Yup.
Will it be useful?
Yes, probably.
Will it be efficient?
Not as efficient as an implementation with C, to be sure. But for small-scale simulations should you should have quite enough power with current JIT javascript interpreters. Tens or hundreds of objects on 30fps looks like a safe approximation, I think.
Can you make use of modern HTML when writing a physics simulation in JS?
The simulation and the display are two different things, but yes, if you want to make a graphics frontend to your simulation, the modern features of HTML and CSS could be certainly useful. But if you write it in any other language, you still have nice choices for visualization.
How to learn JavaScript?
There's plenty of tutorials online, but I don't know any particular one to recommend; perhaps anyone else can fill for me here.
As mentioned by Kos languages that are as High Level as Python or Javascript might constrain you. But later on you can still move critical parts to C-Code. (-> Regular shared Library or even Browser-Plugin)
For JavaScript I recommend you the Mozilla tutorials: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/javascript
Check out the "JavaScript Guide" in particular and keep in mind that not every Browser supports JavaScript 1.7. By the way, you should also checkout jQuery. Actually it might be easier to start right off with jQuery because you need some highlevel library anyways.
By the way: You might also want to check out Processing. (www.processing.org) It might be perfect for you as you are new to programming and it has a lot of awesome vizualization features. It basically a simplified Java with a very easy to use library. You can checkout the pre-installed examples and start playing around. Be sure to check the Reference on the website / the forum if you are stuck with problems. Processing runs on the JVM and is therefore cross plattform.
I recommend Processing very much because you can directly see results and in any case it might be interesting for Prototyping even if you think of using another language in the future to suit your needs.
Actually there is even a JavaScript version of Processing though I never used it...
EDIT: If you plan to choose JavaScript, you should use Firefox in combination with Firebug. It makes life easier when debugging...
Many years back, I was told that Javascript was harmful, and I remember being annoyed with endless popup when I right-clicked an image to download it.
Now it seems suddenly that Javascript is great, and you can do a lot of things with it to let users have native-like web application experience.
I admit I have missed 6-7 years of Javascript literature, so I hope to start anew with SO kickstarting me to understand the following:
Is Javascript mainly concerned about user interface i.e. smoothen interaction between application and users and not about logic processing, number crunching or form processing etc.?
Can Javascript write to local hard drive (besides cookies)?
Can Javascript web application run with Javascript capabilities in browsers turned off? (I would think outright no, but an article on Adaptive Path said 'maybe')
Is AJAX illegal to use due to Eolas patent claim? Is it worth it spending effort learning it when the future is not secure? (I know AJAX is not Javascript)
Thanks. Hoping for enlightenment.
Yes. JavaSscript is usually used to enhance the user's experience and make the site easier to use. It is also possible to delegate validation tasks and the like to JavaScript, however (though this should never absolve the server of its responsibility to check input).
No.
That depends on how the application is written. If it's done properly, then the JavaScript will merely enhance the interface, and the application will still work without it; this is called progressive enhancement.
Not at all. AJAX is used extensively on this very site!
One reason for the resurgence of popularity for JavaScript lately is the emergence of several frameworks. These make the process of writing JavaScript much, much easier, allowing tasks that would previously have been horribly complex to be implemented with minimal time and effort. The most popular of these is jQuery, which is a good place to start if you're intending to get in on the action.
Overall, JavaScript is a very powerful tool that allows you to create very rich interfaces. Well worth learning.
Yes, Javascript is all about client side processing, but also about AJAX where it calls back to the server asynchronously so that users do not see pages reloading.
No
No, but there are ways to gracefully degrade the experience for non javascript users. It requires carefult planning however.
No, that lawsuit was just about the browser technology that enables it. As a developer you dont have to worry about that.
Can Javascript write to local hard drive (besides cookies)?
Not really. However, as HTML5 support becomes more widespread you'll be able to use things like Web Storage and Web SQL. You won't be able to write arbitrary files on the user's hard drive, but using those two technologies you'll be able to persistently store and access data.
Can Javascript web application run
with Javascript capabilities in
browsers turned off? (I would think
outright no, but an article on
Adaptive Path said 'maybe')
It really depends on how you define "web application." You can write web apps without using Javascript for anything but UI candy, in which case you can degrade gracefully without without it. However, it's also possible to write web apps that rely heavily (entirely, even) on Javascript, which will utterly fail without it.
Is AJAX illegal to use due to Eolas
patent claim? Is it worth it spending
effort learning it when the future is
not secure?
I'm not a lawyer, but I'd agree with the other answers -- you shouldn't worry about it. I'm certainly still writing AJAX stuff :)
Is Javascript mainly concerned about
user interface i.e. smoothen
interaction between application and
users and not about logic processing,
number crunching or form processing
etc.?
It's about both. And more than that.
Javascript has really come into its own in the past few years. Browsers have gotten a lot faster at executing it quickly, and people have been figuring out new ways to use the language itself to its full potential. You can really start using Javascript like a full-out application programming language, and not just to write little scripts that animate something or validate input.
If you're just getting back into the language and haven't read Crockford yet, I would highly recommend it. It's a great starting point to realizing the full potential of Javascript.
Edit: Some good Crockford Links
Javascript: The World's Most Misunderstood Programming Language
Javascript: The Good Parts (This is a presentation. Crockford also wrote a book by the same name that I haven't read myself, but I hear it's quite excellent.)
It's mainly for UI, but it can be used to save server-time on some operations (for example, Mathoverflow uses it to render LaTeX) and it's becoming popular to do so. But when you do this, you need to be respectful of the end-users time, because JavaScript can hold up some browsers, while it runs. But in general, it's a good and interesting idea.
Not without permission
If it's written correctly, it can. It's called "Graceful degredation" (some other variant terms exist, but the idea is the same). The basic idea is that you have it such that the JavaScript fails 'gracefully', and links that would normally get handled via JavaScript (i.e. to do some inline next-paging) will navigate to a 'backup' page that shows the relevant content.
I don't know about that, but AJAX can be implemented in different ways, XMLHTTPRequest is just one of them :) (And the most common, and suitable). Generally you like a library do this for you anyway (jQuery, or otherwise) but you can do it yourself for fun.
Yes, in my experience JavaScript is generally used to create a streamlined interface and relays information from the client to a server application for processing.
Yes, if the browser is configured to allow this (most aren't by default since this can be very dangerous).
No, JavaScript will not run if the browser is configured to have JavaScript disabled.
I wouldn't forgo learning JavaScript for this reason - as for the legality of the whole thing I wouldn't feel comfortable advising you about this. Still I think JavaScript is worth learning in spite of this situation.
The Eolas patent covers the embedding of objects in a HTML document (see US patent 5,838,906 titled "Distributed hypermedia method for automatically invoking external application providing interaction and display of embedded objects within a hypermedia document") ... this scope would not seem to include AJAX as a suite of technologies (being essentially scripting in a document to load content elements).
Partial answers:
I think all the security vulnerabilities associated with javascript have been fixed? IIRC the problems weren't with javascript, they were with particular browser's implementation of javascript.
I wouldn't worry about any patent claims on the AJAX technology. Patent sueing and counter-sueing is common place in the software world and invariably ends up with the affected parties licencing each other's technology. AJAX is not going anywhere :)
I understand that client side code must be readable from the browser but I wonder (since there are too many things that I ignore) if there are ways to obfuscate to code to the end user and, if not what is the best practice to "pack" the javascript code.
It is good practice to minify your JS with a tool such as YUI Compressor. I would not obfuscate it unless you have a specific need to do this. There are plenty of online obfuscators such as this one
See this article: http://developer.yahoo.net/blog/archives/2007/07/high_performanc_8.html
Check this out.
Other than min'ing it, I don't think you can really hide js. It all goes the user's browser and there are plenty of ways of seeing it once its there.
See here for a Free Javascript Obfuscator.
Given that it is in fact possible, if the reason you intend to obfuscate is to protect intellectual property, you are probably trying to derive value from your work the wrong way. It's fairly easy to reverse the obfuscation, and you would probably be wasting time maintaining your code.
Focus more on what services you intend to provide to those who visit your site as a means to differentiate your site from competitors
There are tools that could be used to compress javascript code and render it difficult for the end user to understand.
Is there a reason why this won't do the trick for you?
http://www.javascriptobfuscator.com/
Do not put any sensitive or personal information in javascript.
Spend your time on keeping your data on the server secure.
Step 1: Don't.
You would have to do a lot to achieve any meaningful level of obfuscation. Obfuscating the names alone is not enough, since all of the standard functions will still be there (although they may be buried in a layer of shorter/obfuscated aliases), and deriving the purpose of a particular function is easy once the code is formatted nicely again. Anybody who really wants to know what your JS code does can, and will, no matter what you do to it before their browser gets a copy of it.
If you truly have valuable business processes in your JavaScript, then you're Doing It Wrong(tm).
No obfuscation is going to keep your code truly secure and it might just give you the false illusion of security (cf. security by obscurity).
If you do need to keep some portion of your code secret, consider pulling the sensitive portions into a server side script and making (say) AJAX calls to the script. Especially with the advent of JSON, communicating with server-side scripts has never been easier.
It is possible to use following tools:
YUI Compressor - requires Java - very good compressor
Packer - creates the most confusing, and smallest code, but scripts don't run as fast as YUI - this can be used online though. Select 'Base62 encode' for maximum effect.
The Dojo Compressor I've never used this one, but it's on the top-list. It also requires Java.
JSMIN By Douglas Crockford, this one has a very simple algorythm, but it is still good. Meant to be used in combination with JSLint.
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.
Closed 10 years ago.
Does anyone see server-side JavaScript taking off? There are a couple of implementations out there, but it all seems to be a bit of a stretch (as in, "doing it BECAUSE WE CAN" type of attitude).
I'm curious to know if anyone actually writes JavaScript for the server-side and what their experiences with it have been to date.
Also, which implementation is generally seen as the most stable?
I like to read Googler Steve Yegge's blog, and recently I came across this article of his where he argues that Mozilla Rhino is a good solution for server-side JS. It's a somewhat sloppy transcript, you might prefer to watch the video of the talk. It also offers a little bit of insight on why he thinks server-side JS is a good idea in the first place (or rather, why he thinks that it's a good idea to use a dynamic language to script Java). I thought the points he makes were convincing, so you might want to check it out.
A while earlier, he also posted something about dynamic languages in general (he's a big fan of them), just in case you were wondering why to use JS at all.
Why would you want to process
something in Javascript when you can
process it in PHP or ASP.NET which are
designed specifically for this task?
Perhaps because JavaScript is a more powerful programming language than those two? For example, it has functions as first-class data types and support for closures.
Steve Yegge has blogged about porting Ruby on Rails to server-side JavaScript as an internal project within Google ("Rhino on Rails"). He did it because he likes Rails but using Ruby isn't allowed within Google.
Before it was acquired by Google, JotSpot used server-side JavaScript to let you query their database and display your pages. They used Rhino to do it. CouchDB uses server-side JavaScript to create views of their database.
As you can see from these examples, a great way to use JavaScript on the server is for plugins. One of the reasons it's used is that you can create a very isolated sandbox for people to run their code in. Also, because of the way that JavaScript as a language works, you can provide a user tooling specifically honed to the tasks your users need to complete. If you do this right, users don't need to learn a new language to complete their tasks, a quick glance at your API and examples is enough to get them on their way. Compare this to many of the other languages and you can see why using server-side JavaScript to provide a plugin architecture is so enticing.
A secondary popular solution, one which can be seen through a project like Jaxer, is that a common problem of web applications that do client-side validation is that, since JavaScript is easily bypassed in the browser, validation has to be run once again on the server. A system like Jaxer allows you to write some validation functionality that is reusable between both server and client.
Support for JS on the server has been getting stronger and the number of frameworks is getting bigger even faster.
Just recently the serversideJS group was founded. They have a lot of smart people that have been working on serverside JS for years (some of them more then 10).
The goal for this project is to create
a standard library that will
ultimately allow web developers to
choose among any number of web
frameworks and tools and run that code
on the platform that makes the most
sense for their application.
to the people who say "why would you choose JS over java or any other language?" - you should read this Re-Introduction by Crockford and forget about the DOM - the DOM is superugly, but that's not JS fault and JS is not the DOM.
I've never even heard of this, but it strikes me as using the wrong tool for the job. Since programming languages are just tools designed to help us solve some problem.
Why would you want to process something in Javascript when you can process it in PHP or ASP.NET which are designed specifically for this task?
Sure you can pound a nail in with a screw driver, but a hammer works much better because it was actually designed for it...
So no, I don't see it taking off.
Well, plain ol' ASP supported JavaScript server-side years ago and everyone onad their dog used VBShiate instead. But I have to agree with the others: JS does not seem to be the right tool here - and I love to do client-side JS :)
I personally did a whole site in server side JavaScript using ASP. I found it quite enjoyable because I was able to have some good code reuse. This included:
validation of parameters
object modeling
object transport
Coupled with a higher-level modeling tool and code gen, I had fun with that project.
I have no numbers on perf unfortunately, since it is used only on an intranet. However, I have to assume performance is on par with VBScript backed ASP sites.
It seems like most of you are put off by this idea because of how unpleasant the various client-side implementations of Javascript have been. I would check out existing solutions before passing judgment, though, because remember that no particular SS/JS solution is tied to the JS implementations currently being used in browsers. Javascript is based on ECMAScript, remember, a spec that is currently in a fairly mature state. I suspect that a SS/JS solution that supports more recent ECMA specs would be no more cumbersome than using other scripting languages for the task. Remember, Ruby wasn't written to be a "web language" originally, either.
Does anyone see Server-side Javascript
taking off?
Try looking at http://www.appjet.com a startup doing hosted JavaScript applications to get a feel for what you can do. I especially like the learning process which gently nudges the user to build things with a minimal overhead ~ http://appjet.com/learn-to-program/lessons/intro
Now it might seem a weird idea at the moment to use JavaScript but think back when PC's started coming out. Every nerd I knew of was typing away at their new Trash-80's, Commodore64's, Apple ]['s typing in games or simple apps in BASIC.
Where is todays basic for the younger hacker?
It is just possible that JavaScript could do for Web based server side apps as BASIC did for the PC.
XChat can run Javascript plugins.
I've some accounting software completely written in Javascript.
There's this interesting IO library for V8: http://tinyclouds.org/node/
CouchDB is a document database with 'queries' written in Javascript (TraceMonkey).
Considering this, i believe, server-side Javascript did take off.
Server-side programming has been around for a lot longer than client side, and has lots of good solutions already.
JavaScript has survived and become popular purely because developers have very little choice in the matter - it's the only language that can interact with a DOM. Its only competition on the client side is from things like Flash and Silverlight which have a very different model.
This is also why JavaScript has received so much effort to smart it up and add modern features. If it were possible for the whole browser market to drop JavaScript and replace it with something designed properly for the task, I'm sure they would. As it stands Javascript has strange prototype-based objects, a few neat functional programming features, limited and quirky collections and very few libraries.
For small scripts it's fine, but it's a horrible language for writing large complicated systems. That things like Firefox and Gmail are (partly) written in it is a heroic accomplishment on their part, not a sign that the language is ready for real application development.
Flash Media Server is scripted by using Server Side Action Script, which is really just javascript (ECMAScript). So, I do it a lot. In fact, most of my day was dealing with SSAS.
And I hate it. Though to be fair, a bunch of that is more related to the (not so great) codebase I inherited than the actual language.
I think server-side Javascript is guarenteed to take off. Its only a matter of time.
Mozilla, Google, and Adobe have so much vested interest for Javascript that it would take a miracle to dislodge it from the browser world. The next logical step is to move this into the server-side.
This is a step towards moving away from the hodge podge of Internet technology that usually includes all of these
HTML
CSS
Javascript
Serverside Language J2EE/ASP/Ruby/Python/PHP
SQL
I haven't heard much about the current state of Javascript Server frameworks, except that they are mostly incomplete.
I see server-side js will offer considerable advantages in future applications. Why? Web apps that can go offline, client-side db store, google gears, etc...
Following this trend, more and more logic are moving into the client-side. Use an ORM that works for client-side, and use another on server-side (be it PHP / Ruby / whatever), write your synchronization logic twice in two different languages, write your business logic twice in two different languages?
How about use js on the client AND the server side and write the code once?
Convincing?
Personaly i've been developing and using my own JavaScript framework for about 4 years
now.
The good thing about JS on serverside is that implemented in ASP Classic you don't need
any other plugin or software installed, besides i'm also using my javascript (client)
framework on my server, that allows me to enjoy of the same functionality and proven
performance of my functions at both environments client and serverside.
Not only for data validation, but also lets say HTML or CSS dynamic constructions
can be done client or serverside, at least with my framework.
So far it works fast, i have nothing to complain or regret except its great usability
and scalability that i have been enjoying during this past 4 years, until the point
that i'm changing my ASP Classic code to javascript code.
You can see it in pratice at http://www.laferia.com.do
Node.js has taken off and proven that server-side JavaScript is here to stay =)
I can't see most developers getting over their distaste for client-side JavaScript programming. I'd rather go to Java for server-side stuff before choosing JavaScript.