Search Results

Search found 25050 results on 1002 pages for 'javascript oop'.

Page 195/1002 | < Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >

• I don't get object-oriented programming

  - by Joel J. Adamson

  Note: this question is an edited excerpt from a blog posting I wrote a few months ago. After placing a link to the blog in a comment on Programmers.SE someone requested that I post a question here so that they could answer it. This posting is my most popular, as people seem to type "I don't get object-oriented programming" into Google a lot. Feel free to answer here, or in a comment at Wordpress. What is object-oriented programming? No one has given me a satisfactory answer. I feel like you will not get a good definition from someone who goes around saying “object” and “object-oriented” with his nose in the air. Nor will you get a good definition from someone who has done nothing but object-oriented programming. No one who understands both procedural and object-oriented programming has ever given me a consistent idea of what an object-oriented program actually does. Can someone please give me their ideas of the advantages of object-oriented programming?

  Read the article

• Pure virtual or abstract, what's in a name?

  - by Steven Jeuris

  While discussing a question about virtual functions on Stack Overflow, I wondered whether there was any official naming for pure (abstract) and non-pure virtual functions. I always relied on wikipedia for my information, which states that pure and non-pure virtual functions are the general term. Unfortunately, the article doesn't back it up with a origin or references. To quote Jon Skeet's answer to my reply that pure and non-pure are the general term used: @Steven: Hmm... possibly, but I've only ever seen it in the context of C++ before. I suspect anyone talking about them is likely to have a C++ background :) Did the terms originate from C++, or were they first defined or implemented in a earlier language, and are they the 'official' scientific terms?

  Read the article

• What is a “pretty and proper OO” way for handling sessions and authentication?

  - by asdfqwer

  Is coupling these two concepts a bad approach? As of right now I'm delegating all session handling and whether or not a user desires to logout in my config.inc file. As I was writing my Auth class I started wondering whether or not my Auth class should be taking care of most of the logic in my config.inc. Regardless, I'm sure there's a more elegant way of handling this... Here is what I have in my config.inc (also a large chunk of this code is based on a reply I found on SO except I can't find the source ._.): ini_set('session.name', 'SID'); # session management session_set_cookie_params(24*60*60); // set SID cookie lifetime session_start(); if(isset($_SESSION['LOGOUT']) { session_destroy(); // destroy session data $_SESSION = array(); // destroy session data sanity check setcookie('SID', '', time() - 24*60*60); // destroy session cookie data #header('Location: '.DOCROOT); } elseif(isset($_SESSION['SID_AUTH'])) { // verify user has authenticated if (!isset($_SESSION['SID_CREATED'])) { $_SESSION['SID_CREATED'] = time(); } elseif (time() - $_SESSION['SID_CREATED'] > 6*60*60) { // session started more than 6 hours ago session_regenerate_id(); // reset SID value $_SESSION['SID_CREATED'] = time(); // update creation time } if (isset($_SESSION['SID_MODIFIED']) && (time() - $_SESSION['SID_MODIFIED'] > 12*60*60)) { // last request was more than 12 hours ago session_destroy(); // destroy session data $_SESSION = array(); // destroy session data sanity check setcookie('SID', '', time() - 24*60*60); // destroy session cookie data } $_SESSION['SID_MODIFIED'] = time(); // update last activity time stamp }

  Read the article

• Models, controllers, and code reuse

  - by user11715

  I have a blog where users can post comments. When creating a comment, various things happen: creating the comment object, associations, persisting sending notification emails to post's author given his preferences sending notification to moderators given their preferences updating a fulltext database for search ... I could put all this in the controller, but what if I want to reuse this code ? e.g. I would like to provide an API for posting comments. I could also put this in the model, but I wonder if I won't lose flexibility by doing so. And would it be acceptable to do all of this from the model layer ? What would you do ?

  Read the article

• Caching WCF javascript proxy on browser

  - by oazabir

  When you use WCF services from Javascript, you have to generate the Javascript proxies by hitting the Service.svc/js. If you have five WCF services, then it means five javascripts to download. As browsers download javascripts synchronously, one after another, it adds latency to page load and slows down page rendering performance. Moreover, the same WCF service proxy is downloaded from every page, because the generated javascript file is not cached on browser. Here is a solution that will ensure the generated Javascript proxies are cached on browser and when there is a hit on the service, it will respond with HTTP 304 if the Service.svc file has not changed. Here’s a Fiddler trace of a page that uses two WCF services. You can see there are two /js hits and they are sequential. Every visit to the same page, even with the same browser session results in making those two hits to /js. Second time when the same page is browsed: You can see everything else is cached, except the WCF javascript proxies. They are never cached because the WCF javascript proxy generator does not produce the necessary caching headers to cache the files on browser. Here’s an HttpModule for IIS and IIS Express which will intercept calls to WCF service proxy. It first checks if the service is changed since the cached version on the browser. If it has not changed then it will return HTTP 304 and not go through the service proxy generation process. Thus it saves some CPU on server. But if the request is for the first time and there’s no cached copy on browser, it will deliver the proxy and also emit the proper cache headers to cache the response on browser. http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/360437/Caching-WCF-javascript-proxy-on-browser Don’t forget to vote.

  Read the article

• Allocating Entities within an Entity System

  - by miguel.martin

  I'm quite unsure how I should allocate/resemble my entities within my entity system. I have various options, but most of them seem to have cons associated with them. In all cases entities are resembled by an ID (integer), and possibly has a wrapper class associated with it. This wrapper class has methods to add/remove components to/from the entity. Before I mention the options, here is the basic structure of my entity system: Entity An object that describes an object within the game Component Used to store data for the entity System Contains entities with specific components Used to update entities with specific components World Contains entities and systems for the entity system Can create/destroy entites and have systems added/removed from/to it Here are my options, that I have thought of: Option 1: Do not store the Entity wrapper classes, and just store the next ID/deleted IDs. In other words, entities will be returned by value, like so: Entity entity = world.createEntity(); This is much like entityx, except I see some flaws in this design. Cons There can be duplicate entity wrapper classes (as the copy-ctor has to be implemented, and systems need to contain entities) If an Entity is destroyed, the duplicate entity wrapper classes will not have an updated value Option 2: Store the entity wrapper classes within an object pool. i.e. Entities will be return by pointer/reference, like so: Entity& e = world.createEntity(); Cons If there is duplicate entities, then when an entity is destroyed, the same entity object may be re-used to allocate another entity. Option 3: Use raw IDs, and forget about the wrapper entity classes. The downfall to this, I think, is the syntax that will be required for it. I'm thinking about doing thisas it seems the most simple & easy to implement it. I'm quite unsure about it, because of the syntax. i.e. To add a component with this design, it would look like: Entity e = world.createEntity(); world.addComponent<Position>(e, 0, 3); As apposed to this: Entity e = world.createEntity(); e.addComponent<Position>(0, 3); Cons Syntax Duplicate IDs

  Read the article

• MVP Pattern Philsophical Question - Security Checking in UI

  - by Brian

  Hello, I have a philosophical question about the MVP pattern: I have a component that checks whether a user has access to a certain privilege. This privilege turns on or off certain UI features. For instance, suppose you have a UI grid, and for each row that gets bound, I do a security check to see if certain features in the grid should be enabled or disabled. There are two ways to do this: have the UI/view call the component's method, determine if it has access, and enable/disable or show/hide. The other is have the view fire an event to the presenter, have the presenter do the check and return the access back down to the view through the model or through the event arg. As per the MVP pattern, which component should security checks fit into, the presenter or the view? Since the view is using it to determine its accessibility, it seems more fitting in the view, but it is doing database checks and all inside this business component, and there is business logic there, so I can see the reverse argument too. Thoughts? Thanks.

  Read the article

• What's a good entity hierarchy for a 2D game?

  - by futlib

  I'm in the process of building a new 2D game out of some code I wrote a while ago. The object hierarchy for entities is like this: Scene (e.g. MainMenu): Contains multiple entities and delegates update()/draw() to each Entity: Base class for all things in a scene (e.g. MenuItem or Alien) Sprite: Base class for all entities that just draw a texture, i.e. don't have their own drawing logic Does it make sense to split up entities and sprites up like that? I think in a 2D game, the terms entity and sprite are somewhat synonymous, right? But I do believe that I need some base class for entities that just draw a texture, as opposed to drawing themselves, to avoid duplication. Most entities are like that. One weird case is my Text class: It derives from Sprite, which accepts either the path of an image or an already loaded texture in its constructor. Text loads a texture in its constructor and passes that to Sprite. Can you outline a design that makes more sense? Or point me to a good object-oriented reference code base for a 2D game? I could only find 3D engine code bases of decent code quality, e.g. Doom 3 and HPL1Engine.

  Read the article

• PHP ORM style of querying

  - by Petah

  Ok so I have made an ORM library for PHP. It uses syntax like so: *(assume that $business_locations is an array)* Business::type(Business:TYPE_AUTOMOTIVE)-> size(Business::SIZE_SMALL)-> left_join(BusinessOwner::table(), BusinessOwner::business_id(), SQL::OP_EQUALS, Business::id())-> left_join(Owner::table(), SQL::OP_EQUALS, Owner::id(), BusinessOwner::owner_id())-> where(Business::location_id(), SQL::in($business_locations))-> group_by(Business::id())-> select(SQL::count(BusinessOwner::id()); Which can also be represented as: $query = new Business(); $query->set_type(Business:TYPE_AUTOMOTIVE); $query->set_size(Business::SIZE_SMALL); $query->left_join(BusinessOwner::table(), BusinessOwner::business_id(), SQL::OP_EQUALS, $query->id()); $query->left_join(Owner::table(), SQL::OP_EQUALS, Owner::id(), BusinessOwner::owner_id()); $query->where(Business::location_id(), SQL::in($business_locations)); $query->group_by(Business::id()); $query->select(SQL::count(BusinessOwner::id()); This would produce a query like: SELECT COUNT(`business_owners`.`id`) FROM `businesses` LEFT JOIN `business_owners` ON `business_owners`.`business_id` = `businesses`.`id` LEFT JOIN `owners` ON `owners`.`id` = `business_owners`.`owner_id` WHERE `businesses`.`type` = 'automotive' AND `businesses`.`size` = 'small' AND `businesses`.`location_id` IN ( 1, 2, 3, 4 ) GROUP BY `businesses`.`id` Please keep in mind that the syntax might not be prefectly correct (I only wrote this off the top of my head) Any way, what do you think of this style of querying? Is the first method or second better/clearer/cleaner/etc? What would you do to improve it?

  Read the article

• Design: classes with same implementation but different method names

  - by Dror Helper

  I have multiple classes that have similar implementation for different named methods: class MyClassX { public int MyClassXIntMethod(){} public string MyClassXStringMethod(){} } class MyClassY { public int MyClassYIntMethod(){} public string MyClassYStringMethod(){} } the methods inside the classes have similar implementation but because the method's names are different (due to 3rd party constraints) i cannot use inheritance. I'm looking for an elegant solution that would be better than implementing the same functionality over and over again.

  Read the article

• call function between classes [closed]

  - by aziz joh

  hello I have 3 classes class A, B, and C class A is the main class and content the main function also, i call class B and class C in the main as b1,b2 and c1. in class B there is a vector (V) has list of int. and 3 functions Add, get and delete delete. all the thing in the class is public. in class C i have function that need to (B::get) from b. what I want is that how I can make c1 call get of b1 to return the value of the V in b1 after that use add of b2 to add new item in V of b2. Thanks in advance This is an example class a{ int main(){ b b1,b2; c c1; b1.add(10); b1.add(20); c1.start(); }} class b{ vector<int> v; void add(int i){ v.push_back(i)} int get(){int i=v.at(0); return i;} } class c{// take something from b1 and add it to b2 void play(){ int i=b.get();//should take it from b1 b.add(i*2);//should add it to b2 }} please I need your help I been searching to solve this problem for days.

  Read the article

• Actor and Sprite, who should own these properties?

  - by Gerardo Marset

  I'm writing sort of a 2D game engine for making the process of creating games easier. It has two classes, Actor and Sprite. Actor is used for interactive elements (the player, enemies, bullets, a menu, an invisible instance that controls score, etc) and Sprite is used for animated (or not) images with transparency (or not). The actor may have an assigned sprite that represents it on the screen, which may change during the game. E.g. in a top-down action game you may have an actor with a sprite of a little guy that changes when attacking, walking, and facing different directions, etc. Currently the actor has x and y properties (its coordinates in the screen), while the sprite has an index property (the number of the frame currently being shown by the sprite). Since the sprite doesn't know which actor it belongs to (or if it belongs to an actor at all), the actor must pass its x and y coordinates when drawing the sprite. Also, since a actors may reset its sprite each frame (and usually do), the sprite's index property must be passed from the old to the new sprite like so (pseudocode): function change_sprite(new_sprite) old_index = my.sprite.index my.sprite = new_sprite() my.sprite.index = old_index % my.sprite.frames end I always thought this was kind of cumbersome, but it never was a big problem. Now I decided to add support for more properties. Namely a property to draw the sprite rotated, a property to draw it flipped, it a property draw it stretched, etc. These should probably belong to the sprite and not the actor, but if they do, the actor would have to pass them from the old to the new sprite each time it changes... On the other hand, if they belonged to the actor, the actor would have to pass each property to the sprite when drawing it (since the sprite doesn't know which actor it belongs to, and it shouldn't, since sprites aren't just meant to be used by actors, really). Another option I thought of would be having an extra class that owns all these properties (plus index, x and y) and links an actor with a sprite, but that doesn't come without drawbacks. So, what should I do with all these properties? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Deciding between obj->func() and func(obj)

  - by GSto

  I was thinking about this when I was starting to set up some code for a new project: are there any rules of thumb for when a method should be part of an object, and when it should be a stand alone function that takes an object as a parameter? EDIT: as pointed out in a comment, this can depend on language. I was working in C++ when it came to mind, though I'm this is an issue across a number of languages (and would still love to see answers that pertain to them).

  Read the article

• Avoid overwriting all the methods in the child class

  - by Heckel

  The context I am making a game in C++ using SFML. I have a class that controls what is displayed on the screen (manager on the image below). It has a list of all the things to draw like images, text, etc. To be able to store them in one list I created a Drawable class from which all the other drawable class inherit. The image below represents how I would organize each class. Drawable has a virtual method Draw that will be called by the manager. Image and Text overwrite this method. My problem is that I would like Image::draw method to work for Circle, Polygon, etc. since sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inherit from sf::Shape. I thought of two ways to do that. My first idea would be for Image to have a pointer on sf::Shape, and the subclasses would make it point onto their sf::CircleShape or sf::ConvexShape classes (Like on the image below). In the Polygon constructor I would write something like ptr_shape = &polygon_shape; This doesn't look very elegant because I have two variables that are, in fact, just one. My second idea is to store the sf::CircleShape and sf::ConvexShape inside the ptr_shape like ptr_shape = new sf::ConvexShape(...); and to use a function that is only in ConvexShape I would cast it like so ((sf::ConvexShape*)ptr_shape)->convex_method(); But that doesn't look very elegant either. I am not even sure I am allowed to do that. My question I added details about the whole thing because I thought that maybe my whole architecture was wrong. I would like to know how I could design my program to be safe without overwriting all the Image methods. I apologize if this question has already been asked; I have no idea what to google.

  Read the article

• In C++, is it a reflection of poor software design if objects are deleted manually?

  - by grokus

  With the advent of smart pointers, is it a sign of poor design if I see objects are deleted? I'm seeing some software components in our product that people are still doing this. This practice strikes me as un-idiomatic, but I need to be sure this is the industry consensus. I'm not starting a crusade but it'd be nice to be prepared theory wise. Edit: legit uses of delete, Klaim mentioned the object pool use case. I agree. Bad examples of using delete, I am seeing many new's in constructor or start() and corresponding delete's in the destructor or stop(), why not use scoped_ptr? It makes the code cleaner.

  Read the article

• Updating entities in response to collisions - should this be in the collision-detection class or in the entity-updater class?

  - by Prog

  In a game I'm working on, there's a class responsible for collision detection. It's method detectCollisions(List<Entity> entities) is called from the main gameloop. The code to update the entities (i.e. where the entities 'act': update their positions, invoke AI, etc) is in a different class, in the method updateEntities(List<Entity> entities). Also called from the gameloop, after the collision detection. When there's a collision between two entities, usually something needs to be done. For example, zero the velocity of both entities in the collision, or kill one of the entities. It would be easy to have this code in the CollisionDetector class. E.g. in psuedocode: for(Entity entityA in entities){ for(Entity entityB in entities){ if(collision(entityA, entityB)){ if(entityA instanceof Robot && entityB instanceof Robot){ entityA.setVelocity(0,0); entityB.setVelocity(0,0); } if(entityA instanceof Missile || entityB instanceof Missile){ entityA.die(); entityB.die(); } } } } However, I'm not sure if updating the state of entities in response to collision should be the job of CollisionDetector. Maybe it should be the job of EntityUpdater, which runs after the collision detection in the gameloop. Is it okay to have the code responding to collisions in the collision detection system? Or should the collision detection class only detect collisions, report them to some other class and have that class affect the state of the entities?

  Read the article

• How do you know when to split an object method into 2 or more other methods?

  - by blacktie24

  Hi, I know this is a very basic question, but I sometimes find myself struggling to figure out when to split a single object method into multiple methods. For example, I am trying to set up an ACL using Zend_Acl and Zend_Auth, as shown in this tutorial: http://devzone.zend.com/article/1665. However, I am wondering if the My_Plugin_Auth::preDispatch() method should invoke calls to a method called authenticate() and a method called authorize(), instead of having everything lumped in under preDispatch(). I was thinking that this would make the code more readable and encapsulate the logic into its smaller parts, but i'm not sure if this is reason enough.

  Read the article

• Confused about my future. Doubt about .Net or Java way.

  - by dotNET

  I'm very confused about choosing the programming langage to follow in the next step of my life. I'm right now so familiar with C++, VB.NET and PHP, but to jump to a higher level I must choose between JEE(JSP, Servlets, JSF, Spring, EJB, Struts, Hibernate,...) and .NET(ASP.NET, C#). Because I cant learn them at the same time. And you realize that, when I mentioned JEE a lot of things comes to the head. In my personnal experience I prefere the .NET, but Java seems to be a better choice. believe me, i'm not writing a subjective topic. I just want to know what must I follow to get succes in my life. The question here is : Is there any things that can be done with Java, and cannot be done with .NET. Is there any chances that I can follow the uncounted number of frameworks that are always in developpement. ... (also something not said) ?

  Read the article

• Multiplayer in a game. How to design it object wise?

  - by Ninetou

  I was suggested on StackOverflow to ask this question here. I'm working on a simple game and I was thinking of adding multiplayer feature but I'm a bit stuck. I'm not sure what approach should I take, keeping in mind good programming practices. I have a Player object which is created for each player but then I have many other classes that would have to be able to access them. The thing is, if I initialise them in, let's say my main method, then I can't relate to different instances of player class from other classes. The only solution to my problem that comes to my mind is using some form of global objects but afaik using anything globally in apps is usually not a good practice. Any suggestions/ideas?

  Read the article

• How to avoid tons of `instanceof` in collision detection?

  - by Prog

  Consider a simple game with 4 kinds of entities: Robots, Dogs, Missiles, Walls. Here's a simple collision-detection mechanism in psuedocode: (I know, O(n^2). Irrelevant for this question). for(Entity entityA in entities){ for(Entity entityB in entities){ if(collision(entityA, entityB)){ if(entityA instanceof Robot && entityB instanceof Dog) entityB.die(); if(entityA instanceof Robot && entityB instanceof Missile){ entityA.die(); entityB.die(); } if(entityA instanceof Missile && entityB instanceof Wall) entityB.die(); // .. and so on } } } Obviously this is very ugly, and will get bigger and harder to maintain the more entities there are, and the more conditions there are. One option to make this better is to have separate lists for each kind of entity. For example a Robots list, a Dogs list etc. And than check for collisions of all Robots with Dogs, and all Dogs with Walls, etc. This is better, but I still don't think it's good. So my question is: The collision detection system spotted a collision. Now what? What is the common way to react to the collision? Should the system notify the entity itself that it collided with something, and have it decide for itself how to react? E.g. entityA.reactToCollision(entityB). Or is there some other solution?

  Read the article

• JavaScript Class Patterns

  - by Liam McLennan

  To write object-oriented programs we need objects, and likely lots of them. JavaScript makes it easy to create objects: var liam = { name: "Liam", age: Number.MAX_VALUE }; But JavaScript does not provide an easy way to create similar objects. Most object-oriented languages include the idea of a class, which is a template for creating objects of the same type. From one class many similar objects can be instantiated. Many patterns have been proposed to address the absence of a class concept in JavaScript. This post will compare and contrast the most significant of them. Simple Constructor Functions Classes may be missing but JavaScript does support special constructor functions. By prefixing a call to a constructor function with the ‘new’ keyword we can tell the JavaScript runtime that we want the function to behave like a constructor and instantiate a new object containing the members defined by that function. Within a constructor function the ‘this’ keyword references the new object being created -  so a basic constructor function might be: function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; this.toString = function() { return this.name + " is " + age + " years old."; }; } var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); Note that by convention the name of a constructor function is always written in Pascal Case (the first letter of each word is capital). This is to distinguish between constructor functions and other functions. It is important that constructor functions be called with the ‘new’ keyword and that not constructor functions are not. There are two problems with the pattern constructor function pattern shown above: It makes inheritance difficult The toString() function is redefined for each new object created by the Person constructor. This is sub-optimal because the function should be shared between all of the instances of the Person type. Constructor Functions with a Prototype JavaScript functions have a special property called prototype. When an object is created by calling a JavaScript constructor all of the properties of the constructor’s prototype become available to the new object. In this way many Person objects can be created that can access the same prototype. An improved version of the above example can be written: function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; } Person.prototype = { toString: function() { return this.name + " is " + this.age + " years old."; } }; var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); In this version a single instance of the toString() function will now be shared between all Person objects. Private Members The short version is: there aren’t any. If a variable is defined, with the var keyword, within the constructor function then its scope is that function. Other functions defined within the constructor function will be able to access the private variable, but anything defined outside the constructor (such as functions on the prototype property) won’t have access to the private variable. Any variables defined on the constructor are automatically public. Some people solve this problem by prefixing properties with an underscore and then not calling those properties by convention. function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; } Person.prototype = { _getName: function() { return this.name; }, toString: function() { return this._getName() + " is " + this.age + " years old."; } }; var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); Note that the _getName() function is only private by convention – it is in fact a public function. Functional Object Construction Because of the weirdness involved in using constructor functions some JavaScript developers prefer to eschew them completely. They theorize that it is better to work with JavaScript’s functional nature than to try and force it to behave like a traditional class-oriented language. When using the functional approach objects are created by returning them from a factory function. An excellent side effect of this pattern is that variables defined with the factory function are accessible to the new object (due to closure) but are inaccessible from anywhere else. The Person example implemented using the functional object construction pattern is: var personFactory = function(name, age) { var privateVar = 7; return { toString: function() { return name + " is " + age * privateVar / privateVar + " years old."; } }; }; var john2 = personFactory("John Lennon", 40); console.log(john2.toString()); Note that the ‘new’ keyword is not used for this pattern, and that the toString() function has access to the name, age and privateVar variables because of closure. This pattern can be extended to provide inheritance and, unlike the constructor function pattern, it supports private variables. However, when working with JavaScript code bases you will find that the constructor function is more common – probably because it is a better approximation of mainstream class oriented languages like C# and Java. Inheritance Both of the above patterns can support inheritance but for now, favour composition over inheritance. Summary When JavaScript code exceeds simple browser automation object orientation can provide a powerful paradigm for controlling complexity. Both of the patterns presented in this article work – the choice is a matter of style. Only one question still remains; who is John Galt?

  Read the article

• JavaScript Class Patterns

  - by Liam McLennan

  To write object-oriented programs we need objects, and likely lots of them. JavaScript makes it easy to create objects: var liam = { name: "Liam", age: Number.MAX_VALUE }; But JavaScript does not provide an easy way to create similar objects. Most object-oriented languages include the idea of a class, which is a template for creating objects of the same type. From one class many similar objects can be instantiated. Many patterns have been proposed to address the absence of a class concept in JavaScript. This post will compare and contrast the most significant of them. Simple Constructor Functions Classes may be missing but JavaScript does support special constructor functions. By prefixing a call to a constructor function with the ‘new’ keyword we can tell the JavaScript runtime that we want the function to behave like a constructor and instantiate a new object containing the members defined by that function. Within a constructor function the ‘this’ keyword references the new object being created -  so a basic constructor function might be: function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; this.toString = function() { return this.name + " is " + age + " years old."; }; } var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); Note that by convention the name of a constructor function is always written in Pascal Case (the first letter of each word is capital). This is to distinguish between constructor functions and other functions. It is important that constructor functions be called with the ‘new’ keyword and that not constructor functions are not. There are two problems with the pattern constructor function pattern shown above: It makes inheritance difficult The toString() function is redefined for each new object created by the Person constructor. This is sub-optimal because the function should be shared between all of the instances of the Person type. Constructor Functions with a Prototype JavaScript functions have a special property called prototype. When an object is created by calling a JavaScript constructor all of the properties of the constructor’s prototype become available to the new object. In this way many Person objects can be created that can access the same prototype. An improved version of the above example can be written: function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; } Person.prototype = { toString: function() { return this.name + " is " + this.age + " years old."; } }; var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); In this version a single instance of the toString() function will now be shared between all Person objects. Private Members The short version is: there aren’t any. If a variable is defined, with the var keyword, within the constructor function then its scope is that function. Other functions defined within the constructor function will be able to access the private variable, but anything defined outside the constructor (such as functions on the prototype property) won’t have access to the private variable. Any variables defined on the constructor are automatically public. Some people solve this problem by prefixing properties with an underscore and then not calling those properties by convention. function Person(name, age) { this.name = name; this.age = age; } Person.prototype = { _getName: function() { return this.name; }, toString: function() { return this._getName() + " is " + this.age + " years old."; } }; var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); Note that the _getName() function is only private by convention – it is in fact a public function. Functional Object Construction Because of the weirdness involved in using constructor functions some JavaScript developers prefer to eschew them completely. They theorize that it is better to work with JavaScript’s functional nature than to try and force it to behave like a traditional class-oriented language. When using the functional approach objects are created by returning them from a factory function. An excellent side effect of this pattern is that variables defined with the factory function are accessible to the new object (due to closure) but are inaccessible from anywhere else. The Person example implemented using the functional object construction pattern is: var john = new Person("John Galt", 50); console.log(john.toString()); var personFactory = function(name, age) { var privateVar = 7; return { toString: function() { return name + " is " + age * privateVar / privateVar + " years old."; } }; }; var john2 = personFactory("John Lennon", 40); console.log(john2.toString()); Note that the ‘new’ keyword is not used for this pattern, and that the toString() function has access to the name, age and privateVar variables because of closure. This pattern can be extended to provide inheritance and, unlike the constructor function pattern, it supports private variables. However, when working with JavaScript code bases you will find that the constructor function is more common – probably because it is a better approximation of mainstream class oriented languages like C# and Java. Inheritance Both of the above patterns can support inheritance but for now, favour composition over inheritance. Summary When JavaScript code exceeds simple browser automation object orientation can provide a powerful paradigm for controlling complexity. Both of the patterns presented in this article work – the choice is a matter of style. Only one question still remains; who is John Galt?

  Read the article

• How-to filter table filter input to only allow numeric input

  - by frank.nimphius

  In a previous ADF Code Corner post, I explained how to change the table filter behavior by intercepting the query condition in a query filter. See sample #30 at http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/developer-tools/adf/learnmore/index-101235.html In this OTN Harvest post I explain how to prevent users from providing invalid character entries as table filter criteria to avoid problems upon re-querying the table. In the example shown next, only numeric values are allowed for a table column filter. To create a table that allows data filtering, drag a View Object – or a data collection of a Web Service or JPA business service – from the DataControls panel and drop it as a table. Choose the Enable Filtering option in the Edit Table Columns dialog so the table renders with the column filter boxes displayed. The table filter fields are created using implicit af:inputText components that need to be customized for you to apply a custom filter input component, or to change the input behavior. To change the input filter, so only a defined set of input keys is allowed, you need to change the default filter field with your own af:inputText field to which you apply an af:clientListener tag that filters user keyboard entries. For this, in the Oracle JDeveloper visual editor, select the column which filter you want to change and expand the column node in the Oracle JDeveloper Structure Window. Part of the column definition is the Column facet node. Expand the facets so you see the filter facet entry. The filter facet is grayed out as there is no custom facet defined. In a next step, open theComponent Palette (ctrl+shift+P) and drag an Input Text component onto the facet. This demarks the first part in the filter customization. To make the custom filter component work, you need to map the af:inputText component value property to the ADF filter criteria that is exposed in the Expression Builder. Open the Expression Builder for the filter input component value property by clicking the arrow icon to its right. In the Expression Builder expand the JSP Objects | vs | filterCriteria node to select the attribute name represented by the table column. The vs entry is the name of a variable that is defined on the table and that grants you access to the table attributes. Now that the filter works as before – though using a custom filter input component – you can add the af:clientListener tag to your custom filter component – af:inputText – to call out to JavaScript when users type in the column filter field Point the client filter method property to a JavaScript function that you reference or add through using the af:resource tag and set the type property value to keyDown. <af:document id="d1">     <af:resource type="javascript" source="/js/filterHandler.js"/> … The filter definition looks as shown below <af:inputText label="Label 1" id="it1"                         value="#{vs.filterCriteria.Employe        <af:clientListener method="suppressCharacterInput"                                     type="keyDown"/> </af:inputText> The JavaScript code that you can use to either filter character inputs or numeric inputs is shown below. Just store this code in an external JavaScript (.js) file and reference it from the af:resource tag. //Allow numbers, cursor control keys and delete keys function suppressCharacterInput(evt) {     var _keyCode = evt.getKeyCode();     var _filterField = evt.getCurrentTarget();     var _oldValue = _filterField.getValue();     if (!((_keyCode < 57) ||(_keyCode > 96 && _keyCode < 105))) {         _filterField.setValue(_oldValue);         evt.cancel();     } } //Allow characters, cursor control keys and delete keys function suppressNumericInput(evt) {  var _keyCode = evt.getKeyCode();  var _filterField = evt.getCurrentTarget();  var _oldValue = _filterField.getValue();  //check for numbers  if ((_keyCode < 57 && _keyCode > 47) ||      (_keyCode > 96 && _keyCode < 105)){     _filterField.setValue(_oldValue);     evt.cancel();   } } But what if browsers don't allow JavaScript ? Don't worry about this. If browsers would not support JavaScript then ADF Faces as a whole would not work and you had a different problem.

  Read the article

• Why is Magento 1.4 including javascript files by filesystem path?

  - by Josh

  I am in the process of testing a Magento 1.3 site using Magento 1.4. I am seeing very weird and inconsistent behavior. Instead of including the URL of my javascript files, Magento is creating tags with the full filesystem path of the js files, as so: <script type="text/javascript" src="/home/my_username/public_html/js/prototype/prototype.js"></script> I believe this is related to the new "Themes JavaScript and CSS files combined to one file" function. In fact, when I log into the admin and click "Flush JavaScript/CSS Cache", then the first page load is successful, and I see a single JS include similar to: <script type="text/javascript" src="/media/js/5b8cfac152fcb2a5f93ef9571d338c54.js"></script> But subsequent age loads load every single JS file, with the full path names. Which obviously isn't going to work. Anyone have any ideas on what could be wrong or how to fix this issue?

  Read the article

• can I override/redefine "global" Javascript functions, like confirm() and alert()?

  - by EndangeringSpecies

  I want to do some browser automation, and those pesky confirm/alert boxes are a real pain. Disabling javascript completely in this case is not an option, unfortunately. Well, so I was wondering, can I just change the definition of those methods as seen by my browser's javascript interpreter to basically do nothing and return true? Note that I do know about redefining them in the Javascript code directly, e.g. putting in function alert(message) { return true; } but AFAIK this is not a viable approach for this situation because when doing browser automation I have to work with other people's Javascript. Moreover, my program actually begins manipulating these websites already after the page has fully loaded into the browser, so I cannot just first automatically rewrite the javascript and then load the page. Well, so I was wondering if I could instead just "permanently" modify the way alert/confirm are implemented and executed in my browser. Sort of like the equivalent of dll injection and so forth in the realm of windows apps.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202  | Next Page >