I have a function:
setInterval(function () {
var counter = 0;
(function() {
counter = counter + 1;
console.log(counter);
})(counter)
}, 1000)
Why does not it increment the counter? (instead, it logs 1's). How to make it log ascending numbers? (1, 2, 3, ....)
You could use a function which returns a function as closure over counter.
setInterval(function(counter) {
return function() {
console.log(++counter);
};
}(0), 1000);
You are passing an argument to your anonymous function, but you aren't assigning that argument to a variable. You forgot to put the arguments in the function definition.
You are creating new variables with every iteration instead of sharing the variable between them. You need to turn your logic inside out.
(function(closed_over_counter) {
setInterval(function() {
closed_over_counter++;
console.log(closed_over_counter);
}, 1000);
})(0);
Since you are using an IIFE instead of a function you can call multiple times, this is pretty pointless. You might as well just declare the variable inside the closure.
(function() {
var counter = 0;
setInterval(function() {
counter++;
console.log(counter);
}, 1000);
})();
Obscured version of Nina Scholz's answer with arrow functions:
setInterval(((counter) => () => console.log(++counter))(0), 1000);
I am trying to loop through an array, but want to output each value of the array with a delay. This is what my current understanding is on how it should work:
EDIT
Requested JS Fiddle: http://jsfiddle.net/d3whkjww/
loopThroughSplittedText: function(splittedText) {
for (var i = 0; i < splittedText.length; i++) {
// for each iteration console.log a word
// and make a pause after it
setTimeout(
console.log(splittedText[i]),
1000
);
};
},
Yet, it does not work, and I believe it might be, because the arguments in the "for" loop have to be inside the setTimeout function. Yet I don't know how to make it work.
All I get is every value of the array at once, but I want them appear with a delay. How do I do that?
var splittedText = ["Hello", "World", "How", "Are", "You", "Today"];
function loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText) {
for (var i = 0; i < splittedText.length; i++) {
// for each iteration console.log a word
// and make a pause after it
(function (i) {
setTimeout(function () {
document.getElementById('text').innerHTML += splittedText[i];
console.log(splittedText[i]);
}, 1000 * i);
})(i);
};
}
loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText);
Fiddle Demo
Chances are you're going to want to use a recursive function instead of a for loop here. However, I'll explain both ways just in case you (or someone else reading this) has your heart set on doing this with a loop.
For a recursive function, the general idea is that you'll want to call the function once, then let it call itself repeatedly until it's finished doing what you want it to do. In terms of code, it will could look something a bit like this:
loopThroughSplittedText: function(splittedText) {
// Create our counter; delayedOutput will use this to
// track how far along in our string we are currently at
var locationInString = 0;
function delayedOutput() {
// Output the next letter in our string
console.log(splittedText[locationInString]);
// Increment our counter so that on the next call we are on the next letter
locationInString++;
// Only perform setTimeout if we still have text left to output
if (locationInString < splittedText.length) {
// Functions can reference themselves using their own name
setTimeout(delayedOutput, 1000);
}
}
// Call our function once to get things started
delayedOutput();
},
Alternatively, if you really prefer using a loop, you can still do it, but there's a fair bit of fiddling that has to be done to accomplish this.
First, you're going to need to place console.log within its own function. This is because when you place console.log(something), you're not actually passing it, but calling it right then and there, which is not what you want; by calling it, it spits out the text to the console right away rather than waiting until later. Tucking it away in its own function allows it to be passed to setTimeout so it can be called later on.
Second, you're going to have to wrap that function in yet another function to ensure that it's given the correct value of i when it fires. The reason is effectively this: Your intention is to tell the function "when you're ready, use what i was when I set you up." However, what you're doing right now is effectively saying "when you're ready, look at i". Because the function doesn't check what i is until it's ready to fire, it won't know its value until long after you have performed the loop, meaning i will be a number much higher than you want!
As a bit of a sub-point to the above, you'll want to call that function immediately. This is known as an immediately invoked function expression. If you're not familiar with them, they're certainly worth looking up. Their uses are a bit unusual, but they're a powerful tool in the right spot.
Finally, because you're setting up everything right here and now, you want to make sure the timeout for each function is a second apart; as it stands now, you're saying "do all of these one second from now", when your intention is "do all of these one second apart, starting one second from now". This fix is relatively easy; all you need to do is multiply your timeout by i so that you set up the first to go 1 second from now, the second to go 2 seconds from now, and so on.
All of that combined gives you code that looks something like this:
loopThroughSplittedText: function(splittedText) {
for (var i = 0; i < splittedText.length; i++) {
setTimeout(
(function(locationInString) {
return function() {
console.log(splittedText[locationInString]);
};
}(i)),
(1000*i)
);
}
},
As for which solution is better, I would probably recommend the recursive function. The recursive version will only create one function that calls itself for every string you pass it, whereas the for loop version will create one function for every character in the string, which could get out of hand very quickly. Function creation (and object creation in general) can get expensive in JavaScript when you're working on larger projects, so it's generally best to favor solutions that avoid creating massive amounts of functions when possible.
But still, for sake of explanation, I wouldn't want to leave you without the for loop version; the knowledge could come in handy in other places. :)
A recursive function call would do the job:
var a = [
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10
];
function log(i){
console.log(a[i]);
if (i<a.length){
setTimeout(function(){
i++;
log(i);
},1000);
}
}
log(0);
http://jsfiddle.net/Curt/rjve4whe/1/
In my example, it will show you how to loop through an array contentiously until you stop. This is to just give you an idea on how you can do the delay. Also it shows you when the value actually got displayed.
I would say that you could actually create a nice utility from this timer, and use it for multiple purposes and with the utility it'll stop you from repeating large chunks of code.
JavaScript Loop example:
var body = document.body;
var splittedText = ["Hello", "World", "How", "Are", "You", "Today"];
loopThroughArray(splittedText, function (arrayElement, loopTime) {
body.innerHTML += arrayElement+ ": " + loopTime+ "<br/>";
}, 1000);
function loopThroughArray(array, callback, interval) {
var newLoopTimer = new LoopTimer(function (time) {
var element = array.shift();
callback(element, time - start);
array.push(element);
}, interval);
var start = newLoopTimer.start();
};
// Timer
function LoopTimer(render, interval) {
var timeout;
var lastTime;
this.start = startLoop;
this.stop = stopLoop;
// Start Loop
function startLoop() {
timeout = setTimeout(createLoop, 0);
lastTime = Date.now();
return lastTime;
}
// Stop Loop
function stopLoop() {
clearTimeout(timeout);
return lastTime;
}
// The actual loop
function createLoop() {
var thisTime = Date.now();
var loopTime = thisTime - lastTime;
var delay = Math.max(interval - loopTime, 0);
timeout = setTimeout(createLoop, delay);
lastTime = thisTime + delay;
render(thisTime);
}
}
Ok, as It is not an exact duplicate, you need to increate the delay in the loop, also escape from the closure variable in a loop issue
loopThroughSplittedText: function (splittedText) {
splittedText.forEach(function (text, i) {
setTimeout(function () {
console.log(text);
}, i * 1000)
})
}
var obj = {
loopThroughSplittedText: function(splittedText) {
splittedText.forEach(function(text, i) {
setTimeout(function() {
document.getElementById('x').innerHTML += text
}, i * 1000)
})
}
}
obj.loopThroughSplittedText('abcde'.split(''))
<div id="x"></div>
One problem with your code is that i is common to all the callbacks. So the first callback is told "output the entry at index i", however by the time it gets to execute the initial loop is finished so i is now at the end of the text.
One way to achieve what you're looking for is to not use a for loop, but to have a function which (1) prints a character, (2) updates the counter/position, and (3) schedules the next character if needed:
loopThroughSplitText: function (text) {
var i = 0;
function printEntry() {
console.log(text[i]);
i++; // Increment the position
if (i < text.length) { // If there are more chars, schedule another
setTimeout(printEntry, 1000);
}
}
printEntry(); // Print the first entry/char
}
solution using closure
https://jsfiddle.net/x3azn/pan2oc9y/4/
function loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText) {
var splittedText = ["Hello", "World", "How", "Are", "You", "Today"];
for (var i = 0; i < splittedText.length; i++) {
// for each iteration console.log a word
// and make a pause after it
(function(_i) {
setTimeout(function() {
window.document.getElementById('text').innerHTML = splittedText[_i];
console.log(splittedText[_i]);
}, 1000)
}(i));
}
}
loopThroughSplittedText()
One more solution, with a setInterval:
var i = 0;
var intv = setInterval(function() {
if (i >= splittedText.length) {
clearInterval(intv);
} else {
console.log(splittedText[i]);
++i;
}
}, 1000);
There are a couple of problems here
setTimeout should take a function, not the result of calling a function
setTimeout returns immediately, so all the actions in your loop will be started at roughly the same moment, and all wait 1000ms before execting (notwithstanding the comment above however, which means they're all executed at the same moment).
The value of i will all be equal to splittedText.length for each iteration due to not wrapping your loop control variable in a closure.
What you need to do, is wait until the setTimeout instructions are executed before moving on to the next iteration of the loop.
For example:
var splittedText = ["Hello", "World", "How", "Are", "You", "Today"];
function loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText) {
displayValue(splittedText,0);
}
function displayValue(arr, i){
if(i<arr.length){
setTimeout(function(){
document.getElementById('text').innerHTML = arr[i];
console.log(arr[i])
displayValue(arr,i+1);
},1000)
}
}
loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText)
Live example: http://jsfiddle.net/d3whkjww/1/
This will also work
function loopThroughSplittedText(splittedText) {
for (var i=0; i < splittedText.length;i++) {
(function(ind, text) {
setTimeout(function(){console.log(text);}, 1000 + (1000 * ind));
})(i, splittedText[i]);
}
}
Another sample:
var split = 'Lorem ipsum dolor'.split(' ');
var loop = function() {
console.log(split[0]);
split = split.slice(1);
if (split.length > 0) {
setTimeout(function() {
loop();
}, 1000);
}
}
loop();
Bringing out an alternative solution to the problem, which is making use of the third argument to setTimeout which is only supported in newer browsers:
(function (splittedText) {
for (var i = 0; i < splittedText.length; i++) {
setTimeout(
function(val) { console.log(val); },
i * 1000,
splittedText[i]
);
}
})(["Hello", "world", "!"]);
API documentation can be seen here (note the optional params).
You can achieve by 3 ways
1. closure
2. Recursive
3. variable declaration using let
var data = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd'];
closure:
for(i=0; i<=data.length; i++) {
(function(x) {
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(x);
}, 1000)
})(data[i]);
}
let variable declaration
for(const ind of data) {
let local = ind;
setTimeout(() => {
console.log(local);
}, 1000)
}
If I have a function like so:
function x()
{
animate(a, 2000);
animate(b, 3000);
animate(c, 4000);
}
Where - a, b & c - are variables representing elements on the page, and the number is a parameter passed to an animate() function that uses it as a duration value for a timeout, like so:
function animate(src, dur)
{
setTimeout(function() {
src.style.opacity = 1;
}, dur);
}
Everything so far is fine, but if I want the ability to break out of the animation loop, how do I go about it? Will clearTimeout() be what I'm looking for?
Variables that have been assigned a timeout, may be passed to the clearTimeout function, which will cease the function. You can store these variables in an array and easily clear all timeouts by iterating this array and passing the timeout to the clearTimeout function.
var timeouts = [];
/* Save timeouts into a variable and push to an array */
function animate(src, dur)
{
var timeout = setTimeout(function() {
src.style.opacity = 1;
}, dur);
timeouts.push(timeout);
}
/** Clear all timeouts**/
function clearTimeouts(){
for(var i = 0; i < timeouts.length; i++){
clearTimeout(timeouts[i]);
}
}
//Create timeouts
x();
//Invoke clearTimeouts
clearTimeouts();
Yes, clearTimeout() is the right way to go:
function animate(src, dur)
{
return setTimeout(function() {
src.style.opacity = 1;
}, dur);
}
And save returned identifier:
function x()
{
var aId = animate(a, 2000);
var bId = animate(b, 3000);
var cId = animate(c, 4000);
}
Later you simply call clearTimeout(aId) or whichever you desire. BTW there is no loop in your code, setTimeout() executes only once, as opoosed to setInterval().
I've been playing around with a site, in which I want to continue clicking a button for i amount of times every interval seconds.
My code is:
clickbidBtn1 = function() {
var bidBtn=document.getElementById("BidButton");
var interval = 15000;
for (var i=3; i>=0; i--){
setTimeout(bidBtn.click(1);,i*interval);
};
I've found out that GM executes all i amount of clicks at the same time, not with the intended delay. is there a way to delay the time of click? Say i wanted the function to click the button every 15 second for i amount of times.
I was thinking of giving it some more variables, and adding one variable in the settimeout code part, which only executes # the click, then comparing increased variables with current ones before going to the next settimeout... but haven't thought it through yet... it seems to be a complicated process for a simple process... :( i wll play around with it a bit
Use setInterval() for this.
One way:
var bidClickTimer = 0;
var numBidClicks = 0;
function clickbidBtn1 ()
{
var interval = 15000;
bidClickTimer = setInterval (function() {BidClick (); }, interval);
}
function BidClick ()
{
numBidClicks++;
if (numBidClicks > 3)
{
clearInterval (bidClickTimer);
bidClickTimer = "";
}
else
{
bidBtn.click (1);
}
}
clickbidBtn1 ();
Alternatively, without using global vars:
function clickbidBtn1 ()
{
var interval = 15000;
this.numBidClicks = 0;
this.bidClickTimer = 0;
this.BidClick = function () {
numBidClicks++;
if (numBidClicks > 3)
{
clearInterval (bidClickTimer);
bidClickTimer = "";
}
else
{
bidBtn.click (1);
}
};
this.bidClickTimer = setInterval (function(thisScope) {thisScope.BidClick (); }, interval, this);
}
clickbidBtn1 ();
Just to explain why your code does not work: You are calling the .click method immediately (putting () after a function name calls the function) and actually passing the return value of that function to setTimeout. The for loop is so fast that everything seem to happen at the same time.
You have to pass a function reference to setTimeout, e.g. an anonymous function:
setTimeout(function() {
bidBtn.click(1);
}, i*interval);
I use the following code to create countdowns in Javascript. n is the number of times to repeat, freq is the number of milliseconds to wait before executing, funN is a function to call on each iteration (typically a function that updates part of the DOM) and funDone is the function to call when the countdown is complete.
function timer(n, freq, funN, funDone)
{
if(n == 0){
funDone();
}else{
setTimeout(function(){funN(n-1); timer(n-1, freq, funN, funDone);}, freq);
}
}
It can be called like so:
timer(10,
1000, /* 1 second */
function(n){console.log("(A) Counting: "+n);},
function() {console.log("(A) Done!");}
);
timer(10,
500,
function(n){console.log("(B) Counting: "+n);},
function() {console.log("(B) Done!");}
);
The advantage of this is that I can call timer() as many times as I want without worrying about global variables etc. Is there a better way to do this? Is there a clean way to make setInterval stop after a certain number of calls (without using global variables)? This code also creates a new lambda function with each call to setTimeout which seems like it could be problematic for large countdowns (I'm not sure how javascript's garbage collector handles this).
Is there a better way to do this? Thanks.
This is basically the same idea as #balabaster, but it is tested, uses prototype, and has a little more flexible interface.
var CountDownTimer = function(callback,n,interval) {
this.initialize(callback,n,interval);
}
CountDownTimer.prototype = {
_times : 0,
_interval: 1000,
_callback: null,
constructor: CountDownTimer,
initialize: function(callback,n,interval) {
this._callback = callback;
this.setTimes(n);
this.setInterval(interval);
},
setTimes: function(n) {
if (n)
this._times = n
else
this._times = 0;
},
setInterval: function(interval) {
if (interval)
this._interval = interval
else
this._interval = 1000;
},
start: function() {
this._handleExpiration(this,this._times);
},
_handleExpiration: function(timer,counter) {
if (counter > 0) {
if (timer._callback) timer._callback(counter);
setTimeout( function() {
timer._handleExpiration(timer,counter-1);
},
timer._interval
);
}
}
};
var timer = new CountDownTimer(function(i) { alert(i); },10);
...
<input type='button' value='Start Timer' onclick='timer.start();' />
I'd create an object that receives a counter and receives a function pointer to execute, something akin to the following pseudo code:
TimedIteration = function(interval, iterations, methodToRun, completedMethod){
var counter = iterations;
var timerElapsed = methodToRun; //Link to timedMethod() method
var completed = callbackMethod;
onTimerElapsed = function(){
if (timerElapsed != null)
timerElapsed();
}
onComplete = function(){
if (completed != null)
completed();
}
timedMethod = function(){
if (counter != null)
if (counter > 0) {
setTimeOut(interval, onTimerElapsed);
counter--;
}
else
onComplete();
this = null;
}
}
if ((counter != null)&&(counter > 0)){
//Trip the initial iteration...
setTimeOut(interval, timedMethod);
counter--;
}
}
obviously this is pseudo code, I've not tested it in an IDE and syntactically I'm not sure if it'll work as is [I'd be astonished if it does], but basically what you're doing is you're creating a wrapper object that receives a time interval, a number of iterations and a method to run upon the timer elapsed.
You'd then call this on your method to run like so:
function myMethod(){
doSomething();
}
function doWhenComplete(){
doSomethingElse();
}
new TimedIteration(1000, 10, myMethod, doWhenComplete);
I like your original solution better than the proposed alternatives, so I just changed it to not create a new function for every iteration (and the argument of fun() is now the value before decrement - change if needed...)
function timer(n, delay, fun, callback) {
setTimeout(
function() {
fun(n);
if(n-- > 0) setTimeout(arguments.callee, delay);
else if(callback) callback();
},
delay);
}