Search Results

Search found 320 results on 13 pages for 'closure'.

Page 5/13 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • what are the benefits of closure, primarily for PHP?

    - by Patrick
    I am beginning the process of moving code over to PHP 5.3 and one of the most highly touted features of PHP 5.3 is the ability to use closures. My understanding of closures is that they allow anonymous functions, can be assigned to variable names, and have interesting scoping abilities. From my point of view the only seeming benefits in real world applications is the reduction of clutter in the namespace because closures are anonymous. Am I wrong in this? Should I be trying to put closures wherever I code? EDIT: I have already read this post on Javascript closures.

    Read the article

  • Do I need to include the 'this' when using a property name in a closure?

    - by Scott Whitlock
    I'm using a list of Actions to store an undo history for an object. Let's say I have a property of my object called myChildObject and it's being changed, so I want to store the undo action where I would set it back to it's current value: public class Class1 { public Class1() { } private readonly List<Action> m_undoActions = new List<Action>(); private SomeObject myChildObject { get; set; } public void ChangeState(SomeObject newChildObject) { // copies the reference SomeObject existingObject = myChildObject; m_undoActions.Add(() => myChildObject = existingObject); myChildObject = newChildObject; } } Looking at the lambda expression, existingObject is a local variable, so it's using a closure to pass a reference to that variable, but what about the property myChildObject? Do I need to use 'this' to preface it? Do I need to make a copy of the 'this' reference to a local variable first? Thanks for helping me understand this closure stuff.

    Read the article

  • Can I put google map functions into a closure?

    - by Joe
    I am trying to write some google map functionlity and playing around with javascript closures with an aim to try organise and structure my code better. I have the following code: var gmapFn ={ init : function(){ if (GBrowserIsCompatible()) { this.mapObj = new GMap2($("#map_canvas")); this.mapObj.setCenter(new google.maps.LatLng(51.512880,-0.134334),16); } } } Then I call it later in a jquery doc ready: $(document).ready(function() { gmapFn.init(); }) I have set up the google map keys and but I get an error on the main.js : uncaught exception: [Exception... "Component returned failure code: 0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE)" nsresult: "0x80004005 (NS_ERROR_FAILURE)" location: "JS frame :: http://maps.gstatic.com/intl/en_ALL/mapfiles/193c/maps2.api/main.js :: ig :: line 170" data: no] QO() THe error seems to be thrown at the GBrowserIsCompatible() test which I beieve is down to me using this closure, is there a way to keep it in an closure and get init() working?

    Read the article

  • Are closures with side-effects considered "functional style"?

    - by Giorgio
    Many modern programming languages support some concept of closure, i.e. of a piece of code (a block or a function) that Can be treated as a value, and therefore stored in a variable, passed around to different parts of the code, be defined in one part of a program and invoked in a totally different part of the same program. Can capture variables from the context in which it is defined, and access them when it is later invoked (possibly in a totally different context). Here is an example of a closure written in Scala: def filterList(xs: List[Int], lowerBound: Int): List[Int] = xs.filter(x => x >= lowerBound) The function literal x => x >= lowerBound contains the free variable lowerBound, which is closed (bound) by the argument of the function filterList that has the same name. The closure is passed to the library method filter, which can invoke it repeatedly as a normal function. I have been reading a lot of questions and answers on this site and, as far as I understand, the term closure is often automatically associated with functional programming and functional programming style. The definition of function programming on wikipedia reads: In computer science, functional programming is a programming paradigm that treats computation as the evaluation of mathematical functions and avoids state and mutable data. It emphasizes the application of functions, in contrast to the imperative programming style, which emphasizes changes in state. and further on [...] in functional code, the output value of a function depends only on the arguments that are input to the function [...]. Eliminating side effects can make it much easier to understand and predict the behavior of a program, which is one of the key motivations for the development of functional programming. On the other hand, many closure constructs provided by programming languages allow a closure to capture non-local variables and change them when the closure is invoked, thus producing a side effect on the environment in which they were defined. In this case, closures implement the first idea of functional programming (functions are first-class entities that can be moved around like other values) but neglect the second idea (avoiding side-effects). Is this use of closures with side effects considered functional style or are closures considered a more general construct that can be used both for a functional and a non-functional programming style? Is there any literature on this topic? IMPORTANT NOTE I am not questioning the usefulness of side-effects or of having closures with side effects. Also, I am not interested in a discussion about the advantages / disadvantages of closures with or without side effects. I am only interested to know if using such closures is still considered functional style by the proponent of functional programming or if, on the contrary, their use is discouraged when using a functional style.

    Read the article

  • Access to modified closure, is this a ReSharper bug?

    - by hmemcpy
    I have the latest ReSharper 5.0 build (1655), where I have encountered the suggestion 'Access to modified closure' on the following code: var now = new DateTime(1970, 1, 1); var dates = new List<DateTime>(); dates.Where(d => d > now); and the now inside the lambda expression is underlined with the warning. I'm pretty sure that's a ReSharper bug, but is it really?

    Read the article

  • Why does Google's closure library not use real private members?

    - by Thor Thurn
    I've been a JavaScript developer for a while now, and I've always thought that the correct way to implement private members in JavaScript is to use the technique outlined by Doug Crockford here: http://javascript.crockford.com/private.html. I didn't think this was a particularly controversial piece of JavaScript wisdom, until I started using the Google Closure library. Imagine my surprise... the library makes no effort to use Crockford-style information hiding. All they do is use a special naming convention and note "private" members in the documentation. I'm in the habit of assuming that the guys at Google are usually on the leading edge of software quality, so what gives? Is there some downside to following Mr. Crockford's advice that's not obvious?

    Read the article

  • What is a practical use for a closure in JavaScript?

    - by alex
    I'm trying my hardest to wrap my head around JavaScript's closures. I get that by returning an inner function, it will have access to any variable defined in it's immediate parent. Where would this be useful to me? Perhaps I haven't quite got my head around it yet. Most of the examples I have seen online don't provide any real world code, just vague examples. Can someone show me a real world use of a closure? Is this one, for example? var warnUser = function (msg) { var calledCount = 0; return function() { calledCount++; alert(msg + '\nYou have been warned ' + calledCount + ' times.'); }; }; var warnForTamper = warnUser('You can not tamper with our HTML.'); warnForTamper(); warnForTamper(); Thanks

    Read the article

  • PHP Aspect Oriented Design

    - by Devin Dixon
    This is a continuation of this Code Review question. What was taken away from that post, and other aspect oriented design is it is hard to debug. To counter that, I implemented the ability to turn tracing of the design patterns on. Turning trace on works like: //This can be added anywhere in the code Run::setAdapterTrace(true); Run::setFilterTrace(true); Run::setObserverTrace(true); //Execute the functon echo Run::goForARun(8); In the actual log with the trace turned on, it outputs like so: adapter 2012-02-12 21:46:19 {"type":"closure","object":"static","call_class":"\/public_html\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","class":"Run","method":"goForARun","call_method":"goForARun","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":68,"end_line":70} filter 2012-02-12 22:05:15 {"type":"closure","event":"return","object":"static","class":"run_filter","method":"\/home\/prodigyview\/public_html\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":51,"end_line":58} observer 2012-02-12 22:05:15 {"type":"closure","object":"static","class":"run_observer","method":"\/home\/prodigyview\/public_html\/public\/examples\/design\/ClosureDesigns.php","trace":"Run::goForARun","start_line":61,"end_line":63} When the information is broken down, the data translates to: Called by an adapter or filter or observer The function called was a closure The location of the closure Class:method the adapter was implemented on The Trace of where the method was called from Start Line and End Line The code has been proven to work in production environments and features various examples of to implement, so the proof of concept is there. It is not DI and accomplishes things that DI cannot. I wouldn't call the code boilerplate but I would call it bloated. In summary, the weaknesses are bloated code and a learning curve in exchange for aspect oriented functionality. Beyond the normal fear of something new and different, what are other weakness in this implementation of aspect oriented design, if any? PS: More examples of AOP here: https://github.com/ProdigyView/ProdigyView/tree/master/examples/design

    Read the article

  • Intercept method calls in Groovy for automatic type conversion

    - by kerry
    One of the cooler things you can do with groovy is automatic type conversion.  If you want to convert an object to another type, many times all you have to do is invoke the ‘as’ keyword: def letters = 'abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz' as List But, what if you are wanting to do something a little fancier, like converting a String to a Date? def christmas = '12-25-2010' as Date ERROR org.codehaus.groovy.runtime.typehandling.GroovyCastException: Cannot cast object '12-25-2010' with class java.lang.String' to class 'java.util.Date' No bueno! I want to be able to do custom type conversions so that my application can do a simple String to Date conversion. Enter the metaMethod. You can intercept method calls in Groovy using the following method: def intercept(name, params, closure) { def original = from.metaClass.getMetaMethod(name, params) from.metaClass[name] = { Class clazz -> closure() original.doMethodInvoke(delegate, clazz) } } Using this method, and a little syntactic sugar, we create the following ‘Convert’ class: // Convert.from( String ).to( Date ).using { } class Convert { private from private to private Convert(clazz) { from = clazz } static def from(clazz) { new Convert(clazz) } def to(clazz) { to = clazz return this } def using(closure) { def originalAsType = from.metaClass.getMetaMethod('asType', [] as Class[]) from.metaClass.asType = { Class clazz -> if( clazz == to ) { closure.setProperty('value', delegate) closure(delegate) } else { originalAsType.doMethodInvoke(delegate, clazz) } } } } Now, we can make the following statement to add the automatic date conversion: Convert.from( String ).to( Date ).using { new java.text.SimpleDateFormat('MM-dd-yyyy').parse(value) } def christmas = '12-25-2010' as Date Groovy baby!

    Read the article

  • Preffered lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • Preferred lambda syntax?

    - by Roger Alsing
    I'm playing around a bit with my own C like DSL grammar and would like some oppinions. I've reserved the use of "(...)" for invocations. eg: foo(1,2); My grammar supports "trailing closures" , pretty much like Ruby's blocks that can be passed as the last argument of an invocation. Currently my grammar support trailing closures like this: foo(1,2) { //parameterless closure passed as the last argument to foo } or foo(1,2) [x] { //closure with one argument (x) passed as the last argument to foo print (x); } The reason why I use [args] instead of (args) is that (args) is ambigious: foo(1,2) (x) { } There is no way in this case to tell if foo expects 3 arguments (int,int,closure(x)) or if foo expects 2 arguments and returns a closure with one argument(int,int) - closure(x) So thats pretty much the reason why I use [] as for now. I could change this to something like: foo(1,2) : (x) { } or foo(1,2) (x) -> { } So the actual question is, what do you think looks best? [...] is somewhat wrist unfriendly. let x = [a,b] { } Ideas?

    Read the article

  • How is a referencing environment generally implemented for closures?

    - by Alexandr Kurilin
    Let's say I have a statically/lexically scoped language with deep binding and I create a closure. The closure will consist of the statements I want executed plus the so called referencing environment, or, to quote this post, the collection of variables which can be used. What does this referencing environment actually look like implementation-wise? I was recently reading about ObjectiveC's implementation of blocks, and the author suggests that behind the scenes you get a copy of all of the variables on the stack and also of all the references to heap objects. The explanation claims that you get a "snapshot" of the referencing environment at the point in time of the closure's creation. Is that more or less what happens, or did I misread that? Is anything done to "freeze" a separate copy of the heap objects, or is it safe to assume that if they get modified between closure creation and the closure executing, the closure will no longer be operating on the original version of the object? If indeed there's copying being made, are there memory usage considerations in situations where one might want to create plenty of closures and store them somewhere? I think that misunderstanding of some of these concepts might lead to tricky issues like the ones Eric Lippert mentions in this blog post. It's interesting because you'd think that it wouldn't make sense to keep a reference to a value type that might be gone by the time the closure is called, but I'm guessing that in C# the compiler will figure out that the variable is needed later and put it into the heap instead. It seems that in most memory-managed languages everything is a reference and thus ObjectiveC is a somewhat unique situation with having to deal with copying what's on the stack.

    Read the article

  • replace XmlSlurper tag with arbitrary XML

    - by Misha Koshelev
    Dear All: I am trying to replace specific XmlSlurper tags with arbitrary XML strings. The best way I have managed to come up with to do this is: #!/usr/bin/env groovy import groovy.xml.StreamingMarkupBuilder def page=new XmlSlurper(new org.cyberneko.html.parsers.SAXParser()).parseText(""" <html> <head></head> <body> <one attr1='val1'>asdf</one> <two /> <replacemewithxml /> </body> </html> """.trim()) import groovy.xml.XmlUtil def closure closure={ bind,node-> if (node.name()=="REPLACEMEWITHXML") { bind.mkp.yieldUnescaped "<replacementxml>sometext</replacementxml>" } else { bind."${node.name()}"(node.attributes()) { mkp.yield node.text() node.children().each { child-> closure(bind,child) } } } } println XmlUtil.serialize( new StreamingMarkupBuilder().bind { bind-> closure(bind,page) } ) However, the only problem is the text() element seems to capture all child text nodes, and thus I get: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <HTML>asdf<HEAD/> <BODY>asdf<ONE attr1="val1">asdf</ONE> <TWO/> <replacementxml>sometext</replacementxml> </BODY> </HTML> Any ideas/help much appreciated. Thank you! Misha p.s. Also, out of curiosity, if I change the above to the "Groovier" notation as follows, the groovy compiler thinks I am trying to access the ${node.name()} member of my test class. Is there a way to specify this is not the case while still not passing the actual builder object? Thank you! :) def closure closure={ node-> if (node.name()=="REPLACEMEWITHXML") { mkp.yieldUnescaped "<replacementxml>sometext</replacementxml>" } else { "${node.name()}"(node.attributes()) { mkp.yield node.text() node.children().each { child-> closure(child) } } } } println XmlUtil.serialize( new StreamingMarkupBuilder().bind { closure(page) } )

    Read the article

  • C#: LINQ vs foreach - Round 1.

    - by James Michael Hare
    So I was reading Peter Kellner's blog entry on Resharper 5.0 and its LINQ refactoring and thought that was very cool.  But that raised a point I had always been curious about in my head -- which is a better choice: manual foreach loops or LINQ?    The answer is not really clear-cut.  There are two sides to any code cost arguments: performance and maintainability.  The first of these is obvious and quantifiable.  Given any two pieces of code that perform the same function, you can run them side-by-side and see which piece of code performs better.   Unfortunately, this is not always a good measure.  Well written assembly language outperforms well written C++ code, but you lose a lot in maintainability which creates a big techncial debt load that is hard to offset as the application ages.  In contrast, higher level constructs make the code more brief and easier to understand, hence reducing technical cost.   Now, obviously in this case we're not talking two separate languages, we're comparing doing something manually in the language versus using a higher-order set of IEnumerable extensions that are in the System.Linq library.   Well, before we discuss any further, let's look at some sample code and the numbers.  First, let's take a look at the for loop and the LINQ expression.  This is just a simple find comparison:       // find implemented via LINQ     public static bool FindViaLinq(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         return list.Any(item => item == target);     }         // find implemented via standard iteration     public static bool FindViaIteration(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         foreach (var i in list)         {             if (i == target)             {                 return true;             }         }           return false;     }   Okay, looking at this from a maintainability point of view, the Linq expression is definitely more concise (8 lines down to 1) and is very readable in intention.  You don't have to actually analyze the behavior of the loop to determine what it's doing.   So let's take a look at performance metrics from 100,000 iterations of these methods on a List<int> of varying sizes filled with random data.  For this test, we fill a target array with 100,000 random integers and then run the exact same pseudo-random targets through both searches.                       List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method      Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     Any         10       26          0.00046             30.00%     Iteration   10       20          0.00023             -     Any         100      116         0.00201             18.37%     Iteration   100      98          0.00118             -     Any         1000     1058        0.01853             16.78%     Iteration   1000     906         0.01155             -     Any         10,000   10,383      0.18189             17.41%     Iteration   10,000   8843        0.11362             -     Any         100,000  104,004     1.8297              18.27%     Iteration   100,000  87,941      1.13163             -   The LINQ expression is running about 17% slower for average size collections and worse for smaller collections.  Presumably, this is due to the overhead of the state machine used to track the iterators for the yield returns in the LINQ expressions, which seems about right in a tight loop such as this.   So what about other LINQ expressions?  After all, Any() is one of the more trivial ones.  I decided to try the TakeWhile() algorithm using a Count() to get the position stopped like the sample Pete was using in his blog that Resharper refactored for him into LINQ:       // Linq form     public static int GetTargetPosition1(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         return list.TakeWhile(item => item != target).Count();     }       // traditionally iterative form     public static int GetTargetPosition2(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         int count = 0;           foreach (var i in list)         {             if(i == target)             {                 break;             }               ++count;         }           return count;     }   Once again, the LINQ expression is much shorter, easier to read, and should be easier to maintain over time, reducing the cost of technical debt.  So I ran these through the same test data:                       List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method      Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     TakeWhile   10       41          0.00041             128%     Iteration   10       18          0.00018             -     TakeWhile   100      171         0.00171             88%     Iteration   100      91          0.00091             -     TakeWhile   1000     1604        0.01604             94%     Iteration   1000     825         0.00825             -     TakeWhile   10,000   15765       0.15765             92%     Iteration   10,000   8204        0.08204             -     TakeWhile   100,000  156950      1.5695              92%     Iteration   100,000  81635       0.81635             -     Wow!  I expected some overhead due to the state machines iterators produce, but 90% slower?  That seems a little heavy to me.  So then I thought, well, what if TakeWhile() is not the right tool for the job?  The problem is TakeWhile returns each item for processing using yield return, whereas our for-loop really doesn't care about the item beyond using it as a stop condition to evaluate. So what if that back and forth with the iterator state machine is the problem?  Well, we can quickly create an (albeit ugly) lambda that uses the Any() along with a count in a closure (if a LINQ guru knows a better way PLEASE let me know!), after all , this is more consistent with what we're trying to do, we're trying to find the first occurence of an item and halt once we find it, we just happen to be counting on the way.  This mostly matches Any().       // a new method that uses linq but evaluates the count in a closure.     public static int TakeWhileViaLinq2(IEnumerable<int> list, int target)     {         int count = 0;         list.Any(item =>             {                 if(item == target)                 {                     return true;                 }                   ++count;                 return false;             });         return count;     }     Now how does this one compare?                         List<T> On 100,000 Iterations     Method         Size     Total (ms)  Per Iteration (ms)  % Slower     TakeWhile      10       41          0.00041             128%     Any w/Closure  10       23          0.00023             28%     Iteration      10       18          0.00018             -     TakeWhile      100      171         0.00171             88%     Any w/Closure  100      116         0.00116             27%     Iteration      100      91          0.00091             -     TakeWhile      1000     1604        0.01604             94%     Any w/Closure  1000     1101        0.01101             33%     Iteration      1000     825         0.00825             -     TakeWhile      10,000   15765       0.15765             92%     Any w/Closure  10,000   10802       0.10802             32%     Iteration      10,000   8204        0.08204             -     TakeWhile      100,000  156950      1.5695              92%     Any w/Closure  100,000  108378      1.08378             33%     Iteration      100,000  81635       0.81635             -     Much better!  It seems that the overhead of TakeAny() returning each item and updating the state in the state machine is drastically reduced by using Any() since Any() iterates forward until it finds the value we're looking for -- for the task we're attempting to do.   So the lesson there is, make sure when you use a LINQ expression you're choosing the best expression for the job, because if you're doing more work than you really need, you'll have a slower algorithm.  But this is true of any choice of algorithm or collection in general.     Even with the Any() with the count in the closure it is still about 30% slower, but let's consider that angle carefully.  For a list of 100,000 items, it was the difference between 1.01 ms and 0.82 ms roughly in a List<T>.  That's really not that bad at all in the grand scheme of things.  Even running at 90% slower with TakeWhile(), for the vast majority of my projects, an extra millisecond to save potential errors in the long term and improve maintainability is a small price to pay.  And if your typical list is 1000 items or less we're talking only microseconds worth of difference.   It's like they say: 90% of your performance bottlenecks are in 2% of your code, so over-optimizing almost never pays off.  So personally, I'll take the LINQ expression wherever I can because they will be easier to read and maintain (thus reducing technical debt) and I can rely on Microsoft's development to have coded and unit tested those algorithm fully for me instead of relying on a developer to code the loop logic correctly.   If something's 90% slower, yes, it's worth keeping in mind, but it's really not until you start get magnitudes-of-order slower (10x, 100x, 1000x) that alarm bells should really go off.  And if I ever do need that last millisecond of performance?  Well then I'll optimize JUST THAT problem spot.  To me it's worth it for the readability, speed-to-market, and maintainability.

    Read the article

  • Help with Nicedit - removeFormat function

    - by Franck
    Hello, I'm trying to get around Nicedit, and especially the "removeFormat" function. The problem is I cannot find the "removeFormat" method source code in the code below. The JS syntax looks strange to me. Can someone help me ? /* NicEdit - Micro Inline WYSIWYG * Copyright 2007-2008 Brian Kirchoff * * NicEdit is distributed under the terms of the MIT license * For more information visit http://nicedit.com/ * Do not remove this copyright message */ var bkExtend = function(){ var A = arguments; if (A.length == 1) { A = [this, A[0]] } for (var B in A[1]) { A[0][B] = A[1][B] } return A[0] }; function bkClass(){ } bkClass.prototype.construct = function(){ }; bkClass.extend = function(C){ var A = function(){ if (arguments[0] !== bkClass) { return this.construct.apply(this, arguments) } }; var B = new this(bkClass); bkExtend(B, C); A.prototype = B; A.extend = this.extend; return A }; var bkElement = bkClass.extend({ construct: function(B, A){ if (typeof(B) == "string") { B = (A || document).createElement(B) } B = $BK(B); return B }, appendTo: function(A){ A.appendChild(this); return this }, appendBefore: function(A){ A.parentNode.insertBefore(this, A); return this }, addEvent: function(B, A){ bkLib.addEvent(this, B, A); return this }, setContent: function(A){ this.innerHTML = A; return this }, pos: function(){ var C = curtop = 0; var B = obj = this; if (obj.offsetParent) { do { C += obj.offsetLeft; curtop += obj.offsetTop } while (obj = obj.offsetParent) } var A = (!window.opera) ? parseInt(this.getStyle("border-width") || this.style.border) || 0 : 0; return [C + A, curtop + A + this.offsetHeight] }, noSelect: function(){ bkLib.noSelect(this); return this }, parentTag: function(A){ var B = this; do { if (B && B.nodeName && B.nodeName.toUpperCase() == A) { return B } B = B.parentNode } while (B); return false }, hasClass: function(A){ return this.className.match(new RegExp("(\s|^)nicEdit-" + A + "(\s|$)")) }, addClass: function(A){ if (!this.hasClass(A)) { this.className += " nicEdit-" + A } return this }, removeClass: function(A){ if (this.hasClass(A)) { this.className = this.className.replace(new RegExp("(\s|^)nicEdit-" + A + "(\s|$)"), " ") } return this }, setStyle: function(A){ var B = this.style; for (var C in A) { switch (C) { case "float": B.cssFloat = B.styleFloat = A[C]; break; case "opacity": B.opacity = A[C]; B.filter = "alpha(opacity=" + Math.round(A[C] * 100) + ")"; break; case "className": this.className = A[C]; break; default: B[C] = A[C] } } return this }, getStyle: function(A, C){ var B = (!C) ? document.defaultView : C; if (this.nodeType == 1) { return (B && B.getComputedStyle) ? B.getComputedStyle(this, null).getPropertyValue(A) : this.currentStyle[bkLib.camelize(A)] } }, remove: function(){ this.parentNode.removeChild(this); return this }, setAttributes: function(A){ for (var B in A) { this[B] = A[B] } return this } }); var bkLib = { isMSIE: (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("MSIE") != -1), addEvent: function(C, B, A){ (C.addEventListener) ? C.addEventListener(B, A, false) : C.attachEvent("on" + B, A) }, toArray: function(C){ var B = C.length, A = new Array(B); while (B--) { A[B] = C[B] } return A }, noSelect: function(B){ if (B.setAttribute && B.nodeName.toLowerCase() != "input" && B.nodeName.toLowerCase() != "textarea") { B.setAttribute("unselectable", "on") } for (var A = 0; A < B.childNodes.length; A++) { bkLib.noSelect(B.childNodes[A]) } }, camelize: function(A){ return A.replace(/-(.)/g, function(B, C){ return C.toUpperCase() }) }, inArray: function(A, B){ return (bkLib.search(A, B) != null) }, search: function(A, C){ for (var B = 0; B < A.length; B++) { if (A[B] == C) { return B } } return null }, cancelEvent: function(A){ A = A || window.event; if (A.preventDefault && A.stopPropagation) { A.preventDefault(); A.stopPropagation() } return false }, domLoad: [], domLoaded: function(){ if (arguments.callee.done) { return } arguments.callee.done = true; for (i = 0; i < bkLib.domLoad.length; i++) { bkLib.domLoadi } }, onDomLoaded: function(A){ this.domLoad.push(A); if (document.addEventListener) { document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", bkLib.domLoaded, null) } else { if (bkLib.isMSIE) { document.write(".nicEdit-main p { margin: 0; }<\/script"); $BK("__ie_onload").onreadystatechange = function(){ if (this.readyState == "complete") { bkLib.domLoaded() } } } } window.onload = bkLib.domLoaded } }; function $BK(A){ if (typeof(A) == "string") { A = document.getElementById(A) } return (A && !A.appendTo) ? bkExtend(A, bkElement.prototype) : A } var bkEvent = { addEvent: function(A, B){ if (B) { this.eventList = this.eventList || {}; this.eventList[A] = this.eventList[A] || []; this.eventList[A].push(B) } return this }, fireEvent: function(){ var A = bkLib.toArray(arguments), C = A.shift(); if (this.eventList && this.eventList[C]) { for (var B = 0; B < this.eventList[C].length; B++) { this.eventList[C][B].apply(this, A) } } } }; function __(A){ return A } Function.prototype.closure = function(){ var A = this, B = bkLib.toArray(arguments), C = B.shift(); return function(){ if (typeof(bkLib) != "undefined") { return A.apply(C, B.concat(bkLib.toArray(arguments))) } } }; Function.prototype.closureListener = function(){ var A = this, C = bkLib.toArray(arguments), B = C.shift(); return function(E){ E = E || window.event; if (E.target) { var D = E.target } else { var D = E.srcElement } return A.apply(B, [E, D].concat(C)) } }; var nicEditorConfig = bkClass.extend({ buttons: { 'bold': { name: _('Mettre en gras'), command: 'Bold', tags: ['B', 'STRONG'], css: { 'font-weight': 'bold' }, key: 'b' }, 'italic': { name: _('Mettre en italique'), command: 'Italic', tags: ['EM', 'I'], css: { 'font-style': 'italic' }, key: 'i' }, 'underline': { name: _('Souligner'), command: 'Underline', tags: ['U'], css: { 'text-decoration': 'underline' }, key: 'u' }, 'left': { name: _('Aligné à gauche'), command: 'justifyleft', noActive: true }, 'center': { name: _('Centré'), command: 'justifycenter', noActive: true }, 'right': { name: _('Aligné à droite'), command: 'justifyright', noActive: true }, 'justify': { name: _('Justifié'), command: 'justifyfull', noActive: true }, 'ol': { name: _('Liste non ordonnée'), command: 'insertorderedlist', tags: ['OL'] }, 'ul': { name: _('Liste non ordonnée'), command: 'insertunorderedlist', tags: ['UL'] }, 'subscript': { name: _('Placer en indice'), command: 'subscript', tags: ['SUB'] }, 'superscript': { name: _('Placer en exposant'), command: 'superscript', tags: ['SUP'] }, 'strikethrough': { name: _('Barrer le texte'), command: 'strikeThrough', css: { 'text-decoration': 'line-through' } }, 'removeformat': { name: _('Supprimer la mise en forme'), command: 'removeformat', noActive: true }, 'indent': { name: _('Indenter'), command: 'indent', noActive: true }, 'outdent': { name: _('Remove Indent'), command: 'outdent', noActive: true }, 'hr': { name: _('Ligne horizontale'), command: 'insertHorizontalRule', noActive: true } }, iconsPath: 'http://js.nicedit.com/nicEditIcons-latest.gif', buttonList: ['save', 'bold', 'italic', 'underline', 'left', 'center', 'right', 'justify', 'ol', 'ul', 'fontSize', 'fontFamily', 'fontFormat', 'indent', 'outdent', 'image', 'upload', 'link', 'unlink', 'forecolor', 'bgcolor'], iconList: { "xhtml": 1, "bgcolor": 2, "forecolor": 3, "bold": 4, "center": 5, "hr": 6, "indent": 7, "italic": 8, "justify": 9, "left": 10, "ol": 11, "outdent": 12, "removeformat": 13, "right": 14, "save": 25, "strikethrough": 16, "subscript": 17, "superscript": 18, "ul": 19, "underline": 20, "image": 21, "link": 22, "unlink": 23, "close": 24, "arrow": 26, "upload": 27, "question":2 } }); ; var nicEditors = { nicPlugins: [], editors: [], registerPlugin: function(B, A){ this.nicPlugins.push({ p: B, o: A }) }, allTextAreas: function(C){ var A = document.getElementsByTagName("textarea"); for (var B = 0; B < A.length; B++) { nicEditors.editors.push(new nicEditor(C).panelInstance(A[B])) } return nicEditors.editors }, findEditor: function(C){ var B = nicEditors.editors; for (var A = 0; A < B.length; A++) { if (B[A].instanceById(C)) { return B[A].instanceById(C) } } } }; var nicEditor = bkClass.extend({ construct: function(C){ this.options = new nicEditorConfig(); bkExtend(this.options, C); this.nicInstances = new Array(); this.loadedPlugins = new Array(); var A = nicEditors.nicPlugins; for (var B = 0; B < A.length; B++) { this.loadedPlugins.push(new A[B].p(this, A[B].o)) } nicEditors.editors.push(this); bkLib.addEvent(document.body, "mousedown", this.selectCheck.closureListener(this)) }, panelInstance: function(B, C){ B = this.checkReplace($BK(B)); var A = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ width: (parseInt(B.getStyle("width")) || B.clientWidth) + "px" }).appendBefore(B); this.setPanel(A); return this.addInstance(B, C) }, checkReplace: function(B){ var A = nicEditors.findEditor(B); if (A) { A.removeInstance(B); A.removePanel() } return B }, addInstance: function(B, C){ B = this.checkReplace($BK(B)); if (B.contentEditable || !!window.opera) { var A = new nicEditorInstance(B, C, this) } else { var A = new nicEditorIFrameInstance(B, C, this) } this.nicInstances.push(A); return this }, removeInstance: function(C){ C = $BK(C); var B = this.nicInstances; for (var A = 0; A < B.length; A++) { if (B[A].e == C) { B[A].remove(); this.nicInstances.splice(A, 1) } } }, removePanel: function(A){ if (this.nicPanel) { this.nicPanel.remove(); this.nicPanel = null } }, instanceById: function(C){ C = $BK(C); var B = this.nicInstances; for (var A = 0; A < B.length; A++) { if (B[A].e == C) { return B[A] } } }, setPanel: function(A){ this.nicPanel = new nicEditorPanel($BK(A), this.options, this); this.fireEvent("panel", this.nicPanel); return this }, nicCommand: function(B, A){ if (this.selectedInstance) { this.selectedInstance.nicCommand(B, A) } }, getIcon: function(D, A){ var C = this.options.iconList[D]; var B = (A.iconFiles) ? A.iconFiles[D] : ""; return { backgroundImage: "url('" + ((C) ? this.options.iconsPath : B) + "')", backgroundPosition: ((C) ? ((C - 1) * -18) : 0) + "px 0px" } }, selectCheck: function(C, A){ var B = false; do { if (A.className && A.className.indexOf("nicEdit") != -1) { return false } } while (A = A.parentNode); this.fireEvent("blur", this.selectedInstance, A); this.lastSelectedInstance = this.selectedInstance; this.selectedInstance = null; return false } }); nicEditor = nicEditor.extend(bkEvent); var nicEditorInstance = bkClass.extend({ isSelected: false, construct: function(G, D, C){ this.ne = C; this.elm = this.e = G; this.options = D || {}; newX = parseInt(G.getStyle("width")) || G.clientWidth; newY = parseInt(G.getStyle("height")) || G.clientHeight; this.initialHeight = newY - 8; var H = (G.nodeName.toLowerCase() == "textarea"); if (H || this.options.hasPanel) { var B = (bkLib.isMSIE && !((typeof document.body.style.maxHeight != "undefined") && document.compatMode == "CSS1Compat")); var E = { width: newX + "px", border: "1px solid #ccc", borderTop: 0, overflowY: "auto", overflowX: "hidden" }; E[(B) ? "height" : "maxHeight"] = (this.ne.options.maxHeight) ? this.ne.options.maxHeight + "px" : null; this.editorContain = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle(E).appendBefore(G); var A = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ width: (newX - 8) + "px", margin: "4px", minHeight: newY + "px" }).addClass("main").appendTo(this.editorContain); G.setStyle({ display: "none" }); A.innerHTML = G.innerHTML; if (H) { A.setContent(G.value); this.copyElm = G; var F = G.parentTag("FORM"); if (F) { bkLib.addEvent(F, "submit", this.saveContent.closure(this)) } } A.setStyle((B) ? { height: newY + "px" } : { overflow: "hidden" }); this.elm = A } this.ne.addEvent("blur", this.blur.closure(this)); this.init(); this.blur() }, init: function(){ this.elm.setAttribute("contentEditable", "true"); if (this.getContent() == "") { this.setContent("") } this.instanceDoc = document.defaultView; this.elm.addEvent("mousedown", this.selected.closureListener(this)).addEvent("keypress", this.keyDown.closureListener(this)).addEvent("focus", this.selected.closure(this)).addEvent("blur", this.blur.closure(this)).addEvent("keyup", this.selected.closure(this)); this.elm.addEvent("resizestart",function(){return false}); this.elm.addEvent("dragstart",function(){return false}); this.ne.fireEvent("add", this); }, remove: function(){ this.saveContent(); if (this.copyElm || this.options.hasPanel) { this.editorContain.remove(); this.e.setStyle({ display: "block" }); this.ne.removePanel() } this.disable(); this.ne.fireEvent("remove", this) }, disable: function(){ this.elm.setAttribute("contentEditable", "false") }, getSel: function(){ return (window.getSelection) ? window.getSelection() : document.selection }, getRng: function(){ var A = this.getSel(); if (!A) { return null } return (A.rangeCount 0) ? A.getRangeAt(0) : A.createRange() }, selRng: function(A, B){ if (window.getSelection) { B.removeAllRanges(); B.addRange(A) } else { A.select() } }, selElm: function(){ var C = this.getRng(); if (C.startContainer) { var D = C.startContainer; if (C.cloneContents().childNodes.length == 1) { for (var B = 0; B < D.childNodes.length; B++) { var A = D.childNodes[B].ownerDocument.createRange(); A.selectNode(D.childNodes[B]); if (C.compareBoundaryPoints(Range.START_TO_START, A) != 1 && C.compareBoundaryPoints(Range.END_TO_END, A) != -1) { return $BK(D.childNodes[B]) } } } return $BK(D) } else { return $BK((this.getSel().type == "Control") ? C.item(0) : C.parentElement()) } }, saveRng: function(){ this.savedRange = this.getRng(); this.savedSel = this.getSel() }, restoreRng: function(){ if (this.savedRange) { this.selRng(this.savedRange, this.savedSel) } }, keyDown: function(B, A){ if (B.ctrlKey) { this.ne.fireEvent("key", this, B) } }, selected: function(C, A){ if (!A) { A = this.selElm() } if (!C.ctrlKey) { var B = this.ne.selectedInstance; if (B != this) { if (B) { this.ne.fireEvent("blur", B, A) } this.ne.selectedInstance = this; this.ne.fireEvent("focus", B, A) } this.ne.fireEvent("selected", B, A); this.isFocused = true; this.elm.addClass("selected") } return false }, blur: function(){ this.isFocused = false; this.elm.removeClass("selected") }, saveContent: function(){ if (this.copyElm || this.options.hasPanel) { this.ne.fireEvent("save", this); (this.copyElm) ? this.copyElm.value = this.getContent() : this.e.innerHTML = this.getContent() } }, getElm: function(){ return this.elm }, getContent: function(){ this.content = this.getElm().innerHTML; this.ne.fireEvent("get", this); return this.content }, setContent: function(A){ this.content = A; this.ne.fireEvent("set", this); this.elm.innerHTML = this.content }, nicCommand: function(B, A){ document.execCommand(B, false, A) } }); var nicEditorIFrameInstance = nicEditorInstance.extend({ savedStyles: [], init: function(){ var B = this.elm.innerHTML.replace(/^\s+|\s+$/g, ""); this.elm.innerHTML = ""; (!B) ? B = "" : B; this.initialContent = B; this.elmFrame = new bkElement("iframe").setAttributes({ src: "javascript:;", frameBorder: 0, allowTransparency: "true", scrolling: "no" }).setStyle({ height: "100px", width: "100%" }).addClass("frame").appendTo(this.elm); if (this.copyElm) { this.elmFrame.setStyle({ width: (this.elm.offsetWidth - 4) + "px" }) } var A = ["font-size", "font-family", "font-weight", "color"]; for (itm in A) { this.savedStyles[bkLib.camelize(itm)] = this.elm.getStyle(itm) } setTimeout(this.initFrame.closure(this), 50) }, disable: function(){ this.elm.innerHTML = this.getContent() }, initFrame: function(){ var B = $BK(this.elmFrame.contentWindow.document); B.designMode = "on"; B.open(); var A = this.ne.options.externalCSS; B.write("" + ((A) ? '' : "") + '' + this.initialContent + ""); B.close(); this.frameDoc = B; this.frameWin = $BK(this.elmFrame.contentWindow); this.frameContent = $BK(this.frameWin.document.body).setStyle(this.savedStyles); this.instanceDoc = this.frameWin.document.defaultView; this.heightUpdate(); this.frameDoc.addEvent("mousedown", this.selected.closureListener(this)).addEvent("keyup", this.heightUpdate.closureListener(this)).addEvent("keydown", this.keyDown.closureListener(this)).addEvent("keyup", this.selected.closure(this)); this.ne.fireEvent("add", this) }, getElm: function(){ return this.frameContent }, setContent: function(A){ this.content = A; this.ne.fireEvent("set", this); this.frameContent.innerHTML = this.content; this.heightUpdate() }, getSel: function(){ return (this.frameWin) ? this.frameWin.getSelection() : this.frameDoc.selection }, heightUpdate: function(){ this.elmFrame.style.height = Math.max(this.frameContent.offsetHeight, this.initialHeight) + "px" }, nicCommand: function(B, A){ this.frameDoc.execCommand(B, false, A); setTimeout(this.heightUpdate.closure(this), 100) } }); var nicEditorPanel = bkClass.extend({ construct: function(E, B, A){ this.elm = E; this.options = B; this.ne = A; this.panelButtons = new Array(); this.buttonList = bkExtend([], this.ne.options.buttonList); this.panelContain = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ overflow: "hidden", width: "100%", border: "1px solid #cccccc", backgroundColor: "#efefef" }).addClass("panelContain"); this.panelElm = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ margin: "2px", marginTop: "0px", zoom: 1, overflow: "hidden" }).addClass("panel").appendTo(this.panelContain); this.panelContain.appendTo(E); var C = this.ne.options; var D = C.buttons; for (button in D) { this.addButton(button, C, true) } this.reorder(); E.noSelect() }, addButton: function(buttonName, options, noOrder){ var button = options.buttons[buttonName]; var type = (button.type) ? eval("(typeof(" + button.type + ') == "undefined") ? null : ' + button.type + ";") : nicEditorButton; var hasButton = bkLib.inArray(this.buttonList, buttonName); if (type && (hasButton || this.ne.options.fullPanel)) { this.panelButtons.push(new type(this.panelElm, buttonName, options, this.ne)); if (!hasButton) { this.buttonList.push(buttonName) } } }, findButton: function(B){ for (var A = 0; A < this.panelButtons.length; A++) { if (this.panelButtons[A].name == B) { return this.panelButtons[A] } } }, reorder: function(){ var C = this.buttonList; for (var B = 0; B < C.length; B++) { var A = this.findButton(C[B]); if (A) { this.panelElm.appendChild(A.margin) } } }, remove: function(){ this.elm.remove() } }); var nicEditorButton = bkClass.extend({ construct: function(D, A, C, B){ this.options = C.buttons[A]; this.name = A; this.ne = B; this.elm = D; this.margin = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ "float": "left", marginTop: "2px" }).appendTo(D); this.contain = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ width: "20px", height: "20px" }).addClass("buttonContain").appendTo(this.margin); this.border = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ backgroundColor: "#efefef", border: "1px solid #efefef" }).appendTo(this.contain); this.button = new bkElement("DIV").setStyle({ width: "18px", height: "18px", overflow: "hidden", zoom: 1, cursor: "pointer" }).addClass("button").setStyle(this.ne.getIcon(A, C)).appendTo(this.border); this.button.addEvent("mouseover", this.hoverOn.closure(this)).addEvent("mouseout", this.hoverOff.closure(this)).addEvent("mousedown", this.mouseClick.closure(this)).noSelect(); if (!window.opera) { this.button.onmousedown = this.button.onclick = bkLib.cancelEvent } B.addEvent("selected", this.enable.closure(this)).addEvent("blur", this.disable.closure(this)).addEvent("key", this.key.closure(this)); this.disable(); this.init() }, init: function(){ }, hide: function(){ this.contain.setStyle({ display: "none" }) }, updateState: function(){ if (this.isDisabled) { this.setBg() } else { if (this.isHover) { this.setBg("hover") } else { if (this.isActive) { this.setBg("active") } else { this.setBg() } } } }, setBg: function(A){ switch (A) { case "hover": var B = { border: "1px solid #666", backgroundColor: "#ddd" }; break; case "active": var B = { border: "1px solid #666", backgroundColor: "#ccc" }; break; default: var B = { border: "1px solid #efefef", backgroundColor: "#efefef" } } this.border.setStyle(B).addClass("button-" + A) }, checkNodes: function(A){ var B = A; do { if (this.options.tags && bkLib.inArray(this.options.tags, B.nodeName)) { this.activate(); return true } } while (B = B.parentNode && B.className != "nicEdit"); B = $BK(A); while (B.nodeType == 3) { B = $BK(B.parentNode) } if (this.options.css) { for (itm in this.options.css) { if (B.getStyle(itm, this.ne.selectedInstance.instanceDoc) == this.options.css[itm]) { this.activate(); return true } } } this.deactivate(); return false }, activate: function(){ if (!this.isDisabled) { this.isActive = true; this.updateState(); this.ne.fireEvent("buttonActivate", this) } }, deactivate: function(){ this.isActive = false; this.updateState(); if (!this.isDisabled) { th

    Read the article

  • Python serialize lexical closures?

    - by dsimcha
    Is there a way to serialize a lexical closure in Python using the standard library? pickle and marshal appear not to work with lexical closures. I don't really care about the details of binary vs. string serialization, etc., it just has to work. For example: def foo(bar, baz) : def closure(waldo) : return baz * waldo return closure I'd like to just be able to dump instances of closure to a file and read them back. Edit: One relatively obvious way that this could be solved is with some reflection hacks to convert lexical closures into class objects and vice-versa. One could then convert to classes, serialize, unserialize, convert back to closures. Heck, given that Python is duck typed, if you overloaded the function call operator of the class to make it look like a function, you wouldn't even really need to convert it back to a closure and the code using it wouldn't know the difference. If any Python reflection API gurus are out there, please speak up.

    Read the article

  • Event type property lost in IE-8

    - by Channel72
    I've noticed a strange Javascript error which only seems to happen on Internet Explorer 8. Basically, on IE-8 if you have an event handler function which captures the event object in a closure, the event "type" property seems to become invalidated from within the closure. Here's a simple code snippet which reproduces the error: <html> <head> <script type = "text/javascript"> function handleClickEvent(ev) { ev = (ev || window.event); alert(ev.type); window.setTimeout(function() { alert(ev.type); // Causes error on IE-8 }, 20); } function foo() { var query = document.getElementById("query"); query.onclick = handleClickEvent; } </script> </head> <body> <input id = "query" type = "submit"> <script type = "text/javascript"> foo(); </script> </body> </html> So basically, what happens here is that within the handleClickEvent function, we have the event object ev. We call alert(ev.type) and we see the event type is "click". So far, so good. But then when we capture the event object in a closure, and then call alert(ev.type) again from within the closure, now all of a sudden Internet Explorer 8 errors, saying "Member not found" because of the expression ev.type. It seems as though the type property of the event object is mysteriously gone after we capture the event object in a closure. I tested this code snippet on Firefox, Safari and Chrome, and none of them report an error condition. But in IE-8, the event object seems to become somehow invalidated after it's captured in the closure. Question: Why is this happening in IE-8, and is there any workaround?

    Read the article

  • How do I return a variable from $.post() in jQuery? Closure variable?

    - by James Bao
    I am having trouble passing data retrieved from a $.post() function to use in other places in my code. I want to save the data as a variable and use it outside of the post() function. This is my code: var last_update = function() { $.post('/--/feed', {func:'latest', who:$.defaults.login}, function($j){ _j = JSON.parse($j); alert(_j.text); // This one works }); } alert(_j.text); // This one doesn't }; last_update(); //run the function Please help!

    Read the article

  • How large of a swap partition is needed to hibernate?

    - by Closure Cowboy
    I've read this question, but it doesn't definitively answer my question. If I want my computer to be able to hibernate, do I need to have a swap partition as large as my RAM, or will Ubuntu wisely be able to hibernate if the swap partition can fit the currently-in-use RAM? I'm about to install Ubuntu on a computer with a lot of RAM, and a relatively small hard drive, so I don't want to use more hard drive space than necessary. I wanted to avoid giving my actual specifications to keep this question more general, though I'll give them if necessary.

    Read the article

  • How are Scala closures transformed to Java objects?

    - by iguana
    I'm currently looking at closure implementations in different languages. When it comes to Scala, however, I'm unable to find any documentation on how a closure is mapped to Java objects. It is well documented that Scala functions are mapped to FunctionN objects. I assume that the reference to the free variable of the closure must be stored somewhere in that function object (as it is done in C++0x, e.g.). I also tried compiling the following with scalac and then decompiling the class files with JD: object ClosureExample extends Application { def addN(n: Int) = (a: Int) => a + n var add5 = addN(5) println(add5(20)) } In the decompiled sources, I see an anonymous subtype of Function1, which ought to be my closure. But the apply() method is empty, and the anonymous class has no fields (which could potentially store the closure variables). I suppose the decompiler didn't manage to get the interesting part out of the class files... Now to the questions: Do you know how the transformation is done exactly? Do you know where it is documented? Do you have another idea how I could solve the mystery?

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to create a throttle function that can take in as parameters another function (that also has parameters), and the time delay

    - by Stan Quinn
    So I've already written a function that works (based on underscores throttle) for functions that don't take in a parameter, but I'd like to make it generic enough to pass in a function with a variable number of parameters. Here's what I have: (function () { var lastTime = new Date().getTime(); function foo() { var newTime = new Date().getTime(); var gap = newTime - lastTime; // Travels up scope chain to use parents lastTime. Function has access to variables declared in the same scope console.log('foo called, gap:' + gap); lastTime = newTime; // Updates lastTime //console.log(x); //x++; } var throttle = function(func, wait) { var result; var timeout = null; // flag updated through closure var previous = 0; // time last run updated through closure return function() { //func, wait, timeout, previous available through scope var now = new Date().getTime(); var remaining = wait - (now - previous); if (remaining <= 0) { clearTimeout(timeout); timeout = null; previous = now; result = func.apply(this, arguments); //func is available through closure } return result; }; }; document.addEventListener("scroll", throttle(foo, 1000)); //document.addEventListener("scroll", throttle(foo(5), 2000)); }()); But I'd like to modify foo to foo(x) and get this to work (function () { var lastTime = new Date().getTime(); function foo(x) { var newTime = new Date().getTime(); var gap = newTime - lastTime; // Travels up scope chain to use parents lastTime. Function has access to variables declared in the same scope console.log('foo called, gap:' + gap); lastTime = newTime; // Updates lastTime console.log(x); x++; } var throttle = function(func, wait) { var result; var timeout = null; // flag updated through closure var previous = 0; // time last run updated through closure return function() { //func, wait, timeout, previous available through scope var now = new Date().getTime(); var remaining = wait - (now - previous); if (remaining <= 0) { clearTimeout(timeout); timeout = null; previous = now; result = func.apply(this, arguments); //func is available through closure } return result; }; }; document.addEventListener("scroll", throttle(foo(5), 2000)); }());

    Read the article

  • How exactly does gnome manage laptop suspend events?

    - by jcline
    The reason I ask is that, while suspend under lid closure and fn-F4 work perfectly in the Ubuntu (gnome) desktop, I cannot get them to work when using a different window manager (fvwm) on my thinkpad X201. I thought this was taken care of by gnome-power-manager, but when running gnome-power-manager within fvwm, I get no suspend from lid closure or fn-F4. I tried starting other processes as well, like gnome-settings-daemon, but this had no effect. I also tried fiddling with acpi settings, without sucess.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >