UPDATE: The back-end service was powered by an ASP.Net AJAX Web Service proxy.
1) The main page has two global objects, one for the back end connections (Svc) and another for handling the DOM (Main). It also dynamically loads documents into an iframe.
2) These iframes need to access services provided by Svc, and also supply a callback function.
3) The problem - passing a function created in the iframe to the parent frame, it's treated as an object not a function and cannot be invoked.
Can anyone provide a better solution than what I've got currently in the iframe:
var Main = parent.Main,
Svc = parent.Svc;
Svc.method(data, Main.createCallback(
function(response) {}
));
and in the parent frame:
Main.createCallback = function(func) {
return function() {
func.apply(func, arguments);
}
}
if you override the iFrame's function from the main, the main scope will then be used.
The inverse problem can be seen here, in your case, you just override the frame's function itself i.e:
document.getElementById('yourFrameID').contentWindow.targetFunctionInFrame = targetFunctionInMain;
Bonus: if you can modify the iFrame's code, I would suggest to:
In the frame:
make a placeholder function callbackParent() {}
add a call to this function into your iframe code, so that you just have to override the callbackParent from your main.
In the main:
make the function which should be invoked function doStuff() {}
override the function as described above document.getElementById('yourFrameID').contentWindow.callBackParent = doStuff;
I use iframes to modularize my app too.They are a kind of includes embedding all CSS, HTML and JS for a module.
My first attempts were by returning a function too, but then I found it quite hard for sharing scopes.
Now I make directly a reference to the main parent object in the iframe.
eg:
var Svc = parent.Svc, JSON = parent.JSON, $ = parent.$;
Svc.module1 = {
method1:function(arg){
...
},
...
}
The global var JSON and jQuery references are here to have them available inside the methods.
My guest is that Svc.method is making some checks to see if the callback has some criteria before calling it. This criteria might be that the callback function must created by the same framework (here it's ASP.Net). You have to find what that criteria is. if "Main.createCallback" works, it's because it's meeting that criteria.
Sorry but your all wrong... add this....
const event = new CustomEvent('MSGSent', { detail: "fff variable" });
Call it like this....use a global variable for detail... like an array []
window.dispatchEvent(event);
Now after the iframe loads add this code and you get an Object back in the main page....
iframe.onload = function() {
try {
iframe.contentWindow.addEventListener('MSGSent',function(e){
alert(e.detail);
});
} catch (error) {
}
};
The problem is ASP.Net AJAX Web Service proxies, which don't appear to support calling the web service from an iframe with an inline callback function.
Related
Im building a webapp where i load the main page with its own javascript file in the index.html then the nav is calling all other pages in a div without a browser refresh using $.ajax and attaching specific script for each page in the div too with $.getScript.
Sometimes i needs to access a method declared in the main page javascript from within the div loaded javascript so what i generally do is attach the main method to document, exemple, instead of just:
let doThis = function(num){
// do your stuff
}
i do this
document.doThis = function(num){
// do your stuff
}
This way i can easily access it from any other javascript file loaded at different levels.
Thing is i feel its not a good practice, what would then be the good practice? or is it acceptable one?
If you are not using any bundler,then 'Revealing Module Pattern' can be used as a good practice here. This will allow the syntax to be more consistent and in this case, will make it easier to tell which of the functions can be accessed globally.
window.mainPageModule = (function () {
var privateVar = "abcd",
function privateFunction() {
//Do some private stuff here
}
function publicSetValue(value) {
privateVar = value;
}
function publicGetValue() {
return privateVar;
}
// Reveal desired functions to public
return {
doThis: publicSetValue,
getThis: publicGetValue
};
})();
Then, to access the public function anywhere globally
mainPageModule.doThis("1234")
Thanks in advance for the help.
I am trying to monkeypatch an existing javascript function so that one of its lines point to a new location. It would be easy to just redefine the function, except that it is rendered from server side code that has dynamic contents in it.
function GoPrint() {
$.cookie('edit_child','on',{expires:28,path:'/'}); //Dynamically created (edit child could be off)
window.open('../../Common/Output/HTMLtoPDF.aspx','print'); //Always static, need to change this call.
}
In my example, the first line creating the cookie, is created dynamically server side, so the property could be set to off.
I need to the change the window.open to call a different page instead of the htmltopdf page.
Although nasty, I would like to just redefine the function with a replace on the HTMLtoPDF text to point to the new page.
I have started this below, but do not know how to get the existing contents of the function to change it.
function($){
var _oldPrint = $.fn.GoPrint;
$.fn.GoPrint = function(arg1,arg2){
return _oldPrint.call(this,'',);
};
})(jQuery);
Any suggestions?
One way to do it would be to call toString on the old function, sub the old URL out with the new one, and eval the result, but only after considering the security implications.
Purely security-wise, a safer way would be to monkey patch the window.open function inside the monkey patch of GoPrint.
function($) {
var _oldPrint = $.fn.GoPrint;
$.fn.GoPrint = function(arg1, arg2) {
var _oldopen = window.open;
window.open = function() {
_oldopen.call('YOUR_URL_HERE', 'print');
};
return _oldPrint.call(this);
window.open = _oldopen;
};
})(jQuery);
Just wanted to know if it was a good JavaScript practice.
Let's say I have many Web pages that all call an initialization function "init()", would it be the right thing to use an IIFE inside my pattern to run the function everytime the script is loaded?
var foo = (function() {
var bar = "something";
(function init() {
// Do something crazy that's gonna be the same across all my web pages
// like adding an event listener or something
// ...
document.write('page init...');
}());
function privatePage1() {
// This stuff is gonna be used only in page1.html via foo.privatePage1
document.write('page 1' + bar);
}
function privatePage2() {
// This stuff is gonna be used only in page2.html via foo.privatePage2
document.write('page 2' + bar);
}
return {
privatePage1: privatePage1,
privatePage2: privatePage2
}
}());
This is a pretty subjective area, but here's my take:
When you use the module pattern, you're providing a contained set of functionality to the rest of your code. It's essentially a mini-library.
In general, I wouldn't expect a library to do anything when I load it, other than initialization steps that are entirely internal to the library (e.g. setting up the configuration, instantiating a few necessary objects, etc) - nothing that actually affects the DOM or otherwise significantly alters the environment (which is why I've never been entirely comfortable with libraries like Date.js or Prototype that change the prototypes of basic objects).
There are a couple of reasons for this, but the main one is that I don't want to have to worry about the load order of my libraries/modules, other than simply managing dependencies. Independent modules shouldn't affect each other at all. When you manipulate the DOM in your module at load time, sooner or later you'll realize that another piece of your code is expecting the DOM to be in a certain state at a certain time, and that you now have to care about whether you load your module before or after that time. This is an extra bit of complexity that's essentially hidden in the script tag that loads your module.
The other issue here is portability and adaptability. Maybe you'll want to use your module in another project with another DOM setup. Maybe you'll want to pass a different DOM element or config variable to the init() function on a specific page. If you execute init() automagically, you lose the opportunity for configuration.
So what I generally do is to set the init() method as an attribute of the returned module object:
var foo = (function() {
function init() {
// Do something crazy that's gonna be the same across all my web pages
}
//...
return {
init: init,
// etc
}
}());
and then call it as needed elsewhere in my code:
foo.init();
Yes, this adds an extra line of redundant code to the initialization for all my pages (though this is probably just one other script anyway, so the added weight is all of 11 characters). But it allows me a more fine-grained control over when the module is initialized, and offers a hook for configuration arguments when I (inevitably) determine I need them later.
Is the init() function the same across web pages? If so, this is what I'd do:
var foo = (function()
{
init();
return {};
}());
If not, I don't see a reason to use an IIFE, and would simplify your original code like so:
var foo = (function()
{
/* body of the original IIFE here */
return {};
}());
I want to do something that in a classical object oriented language like Java, C# etc. is very easy to do. I simply want to access a property of an instantiated object. The object is globally scoped in the browser's window object, and provided by the twitter #anywhere API.
For my code examples, assume you have already logged the user in.
If I were using java for instance, I would say (assuming all fields were public:
twttr = new twtter();
String screenName = twtter.currentUser.data('screen_name');
For some reason, this is way hard in Javascript. I've gotten a workaround working where inside the anonymous method that the twitter anywhere API is using, I set the value I want to a DOM element, and fish it out later. This is ugly though. I just want to access it directly.
Here's what I have so far, which doesn't even pass syntax checks in eclipse:
function AnywhereFacade()
{
var twitterReference;
window.twttr.anywhere
(
return function(T)
{
twitterReference = T;
};
)
getValue(propertyToGet)
{
return twitterReference.currentUser.data(propertyToGet);
}
};
var anywhereFacade = AnywhereFacade();
var screen_name = anywhereFacade.getValue("screen_name");
alert("screen name is: " + propertyGetter);
Please help! Why is Javascript so hard to use anyway? What I'm trying to do is use a closure I think.
Thanks!
I have done something similar in my app since I am using the Facebook JavaScript SDK and Twitter SDK and want to provide a consistent interface to access both. So I namespace the variables under App. For twitter anywhere, this is how the variable is captured.
window.App = {};
twttr.anywhere(function(T) {
App.Twitter = {
getValue: function(property) {
return T.currentUser.data(property);
},
getPublicTimeline: function() {
return T.Status.publicTimelime();
}
};
});
We are calling the anywhere function and passing it a callback function. The callback function is needed because the anywhere library might not be loaded at this point. By passing the entire function, we are saying that this function should be executed whenever the anywhere library is loaded.
Now when the library does load, this function will execute, define the App.Twitter property which contains a getValue function. The anywhere or T object is captured in the closure.
If you now call,
App.Twitter.getValue("screen_name");
the actually anywhere object (T), will be used to get the screen_name property.
this is all I needed to do.
document.getElementById('messagePanel').innerHTML = "loading...";
window.twttr.anywhere(function(T)
{
document.getElementById('messagePanel').innerHTML = "screen_name: " + T.currentUser.data('screen_name');
});
this made me realize my issue was just that I had to use a callback for when twitter returned from the async call. that helped me solve my initial problem of how to wrap it for gwt.
I know. It is possible to dynamically load JavaScript and style sheet file into header of document. In the other hand, it is possible to remove script and style sheet tag from header of document. However, loaded JavaScript is still live in memory.
Is it possible to destroy loaded JavaScript from web browser memory? I think. It should be something like the following pseudo code.
// Scan all variables in loaded JavaScript file.
var loadedVariable = getLoadedVariable(JavaScriptFile);
for(var variable in loadedVariable)
{
variable = null;
}
// Do same thing with function.
Is it possible to create some JavaScript for doing like this?
Thanks,
PS. Now, you can use xLazyLoader and jQuery for dynamic loading content.
If the loaded script is assigned to a window property, for instance with the module pattern like so:
window.NiftyThing = (function() {
function doSomething() { ... }
return {
doSomething: doSomething
};
})();
or
window.NiftyThing = {
doSomething: function() { ... }
};
or
NiftyThing = {
doSomething: function() { ... }
};
Then you can delete the property that references it:
delete window.NiftyThing;
...which removes at least that one main reference to it; if there are other references to it, it may not get cleaned up.
If the var keyword has been used:
var NiftyThing = {
doSomething: function() { ... }
};
...then it's not a property and you can't use delete, so setting to undefined or null will break the reference:
NiftyThing = undefined;
You can hedge your bets:
NiftyThing = undefined;
try { delete NiftyThing; } catch (e) { }
In all cases, it's up to the JavaScript implementation to determine that there are no outstanding external references to the loaded script and clean up, but at least you're giving it the opportunity.
If, as Guffa says, the loaded script doesn't use the module pattern, then you need to apply these rules to all of its symbols. Which is yet another reason why the module pattern is a Good Thing(tm). ;-)
It might be possible to remove a Javascript file that has been loaded, but that doesn't undo what the code has done, i.e. the functions that was in the code are still defined.
You can remove a function definition by simply replacing it with something else:
myFunction = null;
This doesn't remove the identifier, but it's not a function any more.