Search Results

Search found 1405 results on 57 pages for 'prototype'.

Page 1/57 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Relation between [[Prototype]] and prototype in JavaScript

    - by Claudiu
    From http://www.jibbering.com/faq/faq_notes/closures.html : Note: ECMAScript defines an internal [[prototype]] property of the internal Object type. This property is not directly accessible with scripts, but it is the chain of objects referred to with the internal [[prototype]] property that is used in property accessor resolution; the object's prototype chain. A public prototype property exists to allow the assignment, definition and manipulation of prototypes in association with the internal [[prototype]] property. The details of the relationship between to two are described in ECMA 262 (3rd edition) and are beyond the scope of this discussion. What are the details of the relationship between the two? I've browsed through ECMA 262 and all I've read there is stuff like: The constructor’s associated prototype can be referenced by the program expression constructor.prototype, Native ECMAScript objects have an internal property called [[Prototype]]. The value of this property is either null or an object and is used for implementing inheritance. Every built-in function and every built-in constructor has the Function prototype object, which is the initial value of the expression Function.prototype Every built-in prototype object has the Object prototype object, which is the initial value of the expression Object.prototype (15.3.2.1), as the value of its internal [[Prototype]] property, except the Object prototype object itself. From this all I gather is that the [[Prototype]] property is equivalent to the prototype property for pretty much any object. Am I mistaken?

    Read the article

  • What is a software prototype?

    - by Stack Stock
    I understand this site is for programmers, and i have to ask specific coding question. I am doing a software engineering degree and i have been asked to reference at-least 7 books in my definition of prototyping. The best place to ask is here because most of you have probably read books on this and would be able to recommend books to me. I dont mind buying them from Amazon so if you could some books for me that define prototyping or a prototype i would really appreciate it.

    Read the article

  • Simple Prototype.js code to select multiple elements with the same classname

    - by stephemurdoch
    I have one link with an id of "link", and I use the javascript below to open that link up in a modalbox: #In my template I have: <a href="some/path" id="link">link</a> #Then in my application.js file I have: document.observe('dom:loaded', function() { $('login-link').observe('click', function(event) { event.stop(); Modalbox.show(this.href,{title: 'some title', width: 500}); }); }) Since id's must be unique, this javascript only works for one element per page so I use it to observe my login-link and it has served me well. Until now. I want to use the same javascript to observe multiple links which have classnames instead of id's as below: <a href="link/to/some/stuff" class="link">link 1</a> <a href="link/to/some/other/stuff" class="link">link 2</a> When I do this, I can't get any of the links to open in a modalbox. If I change the class to an id for each link, then I can get the first link in the list to open in a modalbox. I've tried to use the '$$' notation to build an array of links in my javascript (shown below) but if I do that, then none of the links open correctly #document.observe method removed for display purposes $$('link').observe('click', function(event) { event.stop(); Modalbox.show(this.href,{title: 'some title', width: 500} ); }); My javascript skills obviously suck. Does anyone know how to fix the problem?

    Read the article

  • Setting javascript prototype function within object class declaration

    - by Tauren
    Normally, I've seen prototype functions declared outside the class definition, like this: function Container(param) { this.member = param; } Container.prototype.stamp = function (string) { return this.member + string; } var container1 = new Container('A'); alert(container1.member); alert(container1.stamp('X')); This code produces two alerts with the values "A" and "AX". I'd like to define the prototype function INSIDE of the class definition. Is there anything wrong with doing something like this? function Container(param) { this.member = param; if (!Container.prototype.stamp) { Container.prototype.stamp = function() { return this.member + string; } } } I was trying this so that I could access a private variable in the class. But I've discovered that if my prototype function references a private var, the value of the private var is always the value that was used when the prototype function was INITIALLY created, not the value in the object instance: Container = function(param) { this.member = param; var privateVar = param; if (!Container.prototype.stamp) { Container.prototype.stamp = function(string) { return privateVar + this.member + string; } } } var container1 = new Container('A'); var container2 = new Container('B'); alert(container1.stamp('X')); alert(container2.stamp('X')); This code produces two alerts with the values "AAX" and "ABX". I was hoping the output would be "AAX" and "BBX". I'm curious why this doesn't work, and if there is some other pattern that I could use instead.

    Read the article

  • Prototype and jQuery concatenation failure

    - by Corey Hart
    I found something strange when trying to concatenate prototype and jQuery. It seems as though when concatenated, the $ jquery reference doesn't get overwritten by prototype. I've built two test cases to single this out, and it's failing in Chrome8 and FF 3.6. Test Case 1 - Without Concatenation jQuery and Prototype are loaded separately with different script tags. jQuery is loaded first, Prototype second. Test Case 2 - With Concatenation jQuery and Prototype are concatenated into a single file, and loaded with a single script tag. jQuery is first in the script, and prototype is added second. These should act identically, but the second test is throwing errors because the $ function in prototype doesn't overwrite the $ jquery reference. Did I set these up wrong, or are browsers rendering javascript differently when it's all in the same file?

    Read the article

  • Misunderstanding I have about javascript prototype inheritance

    - by Ilya
    Simple questions. function p() { function A() { this.random = "random"; } A.prototype.newfunc = function(){ alert("5");} function B() { } B.prototype = new A(); var bObj = new B(); } Q1: When I set B's prototype, I don't get how B's prototype property will update when/if A's prototype is updated. I mean, to me it just inherits/copies all those properties. It's not like it's: B.prototype = A.prototype where B and A are one in the same. Q2: After A is being returned and intialized to the prototype object of B, how does JS know not to include that prototype property? What I mean is, we never have this type of situation occuring as the JS interpreter knows just to chop off the property of A's prototype: B.prototype = new A(); //any A object has an associated prototype object B.prototype.prototype;//after initialization we no longer have the separate prototype property of A

    Read the article

  • How to get jQuery to work with Prototype

    - by thinkfuture
    Ok so here is the situation. Been pulling my hair out on this one. I'm a noob at this. Only been using rails for about 6 weeks. I'm using the standard setup package, and my code leverages prototype helpers heavily. Like I said, noob ;) So I'm trying to put in some jQuery effects, like PrettyPhoto. But what happens is that when the page is first loaded, PrettyPhoto works great. However, once someone uses a Prototype helper, like a link created with link_to_remote, Prettyphoto stops working. I've tried jRails, all of the fixes proposed on the JQuery site to stop conflicts... http://docs.jquery.com/Using_jQuery_with_Other_Libraries ...even done some crazy things likes renaming all of the $ in prototype.js to $$$ to no avail. Either the prototype helpers break, or jQuery breaks. Seems nothing I do can get these to work together. Any ideas? Here is part of my application.html.erb <%= javascript_include_tag 'application' %> <%= javascript_include_tag 'tooltip' %> <%= javascript_include_tag 'jquery' %> <%= javascript_include_tag 'jquery-ui' %> <%= javascript_include_tag "jquery.prettyPhoto" %> <%= javascript_include_tag 'prototype' %> <%= javascript_include_tag 'scriptalicious' %> </head> <body> <script type="text/javascript" charset="utf-8"> jQuery(document).ready( function() { jQuery("a[rel^='prettyPhoto']").prettyPhoto(); }); </script> If I put prototype before jquery, the prototype helpers don't work If I put the noconflict clause in, neither works. Thanks in advance! Chris BTW: when I try this, from the jQuery site: <script> jQuery.noConflict(); // Use jQuery via jQuery(...) jQuery(document).ready(function(){ jQuery("div").hide(); }); // Use Prototype with $(...), etc. $('someid').hide(); </script> my page disappears!

    Read the article

  • Javascript private member on prototype...

    - by Wilq32
    Well I tried to figure out is this possible in any way. Here is code: a=function(text) { var b=text; if (!arguments.callee.prototype.get) arguments.callee.prototype.get=function() { return b; } else alert('already created!'); } var c=new a("test"); // creates prototype instance of getter var d=new a("ojoj"); // alerts already created alert(c.get()) // alerts test alert(d.get()) // alerts test from context of creating prototype function :( As you see I tried to create prototype getter. For what? Well if you write something like this: a=function(text) { var b=text; this.getText=function(){ return b} } ... everything should be fine.. but in fact every time I create object - i create getText function that uses memory. I would like to have one prototypical function lying in memory that would do the same... Any ideas? EDIT: I tried solution given by Christoph, and it seems that its only known solution for now. It need to remember id information to retrieve value from context, but whole idea is nice for me :) Id is only one thing to remember, everything else can be stored once in memory. In fact you could store a lot of private members this way, and use anytime only one id. Actually this is satisfying me :) (unless someone got better idea). someFunc = function() { var store = new Array(); var guid=0; var someFunc = function(text) { this.__guid=guid; store[guid++]=text; } someFunc.prototype.getValue=function() { return store[this.__guid]; } return someFunc; }() a=new someFunc("test"); b=new someFunc("test2"); alert(a.getValue()); alert(b.getValue());

    Read the article

  • Hiding a dropdown menu without it flashing with prototype

    - by TenJack
    I have a number of dropdowns and divs that are hidden when the page loads and can be toggled with a click or mouseover, but some of them flash b/c the javascript does not run in time. I have their display initially set to block and then I use javascript/prototype to find the element and hide it. I have tried loading these "hider" functions using dom:loaded but there is still flashing. This is an example of a dropdown prototype initialization funtion. From http://www.makesites.cc/programming/by-makis/simple-drop-down-menu-with-prototype/: var DropDownMenu = Class.create(); DropDownMenu.prototype = { initialize: function(menuElement) { menuElement.childElements().each(function(node){ // if there is a submenu var submenu = $A(node.getElementsByTagName("ul")).first(); if(submenu != null){ // make sub-menu invisible Element.extend(submenu).setStyle({display: 'none'}); // toggle the visibility of the submenu node.onmouseover = node.onmouseout = function(){ Element.toggle(submenu); } } }); } }; Is there a better way to hide div's or dropdowns to avoid this flashing?

    Read the article

  • How can I inject Javascript (including Prototype.js) in other sites without cluttering the global na

    - by Daniel Magliola
    I'm currently on a project that is a big site that uses the Prototype library, and there is already a humongous amount of Javascript code. We're now working on a piece of code that will get "injected" into other people's sites (picture people adding a <script> tag in their sites) which will then run our code and add a bunch of DOM elements and functionality to their site. This will have new pieces of code, and will also reuse a lot of the code that we use on our main site. The problem I have is that it's of course not cool to just add a <script> that will include Prototype in people's pages. If we do that in a page that's already using ANY framework, we're guaranteed to screw everything up. jQuery gives us the option to "rename" the $ object, so it could handle this situation decently, except obviously for the fact that we're not using jQuery, so we'd have to migrate everything. Right now i'm contemplating a number of ugly choices, and I'm not sure what's best... Rewrite everything to use jQuery, with a renamed $ object everywhere. Creating a "new" Prototype library with only the subset we'd be using in "injected" code, and renaming $ to something else. Then again I'd have to adapt the parts of my code that would be shared somehow. Not using a library at all in injected code, to keep it as clean as possible, and rewriting the shared code to use no library at all. This would obviously degenerate into us creating our own frankenstein of a library, which is probably the worst case scenario ever. I'm wondering what you guys think I could do, and also whether there's some magic option that would solve all my problems... For example, do you think I could use something like Caja / Cajita to sandbox my own code and isolate it from the rest of the site, and have Prototype inside of there? Or am I completely missing the point with that? I also read once about a technique for bookmarklets, were you add your code like this: (function() { /* your code */ })(); And then your code is all inside your anonymous function and you haven't touched the global namespace at all. Do you think I could make one file containing: (function() { /* Full Code of the Prototype file here */ /* All my code that will run in the "other" site */ InitializeStuff_CreateDOMElements_AttachEventHandlers(); })(); Would that work? Would it accomplish the objective of not cluttering the global namespace, and not killing the functionality on a site that uses jQuery, for example? Or is Prototype too complex somehow to isolate it like that? (NOTE: I think I know that that would create closures everywhere and that's slower, but I don't care too much about performance, my code is not doing anything that complex)

    Read the article

  • Prototype to JQuery - how to access originator of event

    - by ciaranarcher
    Hi there I'm coming from a Prototype background and looking into JQuery. I'd like to know the 'right' way to do attach a click event to a bunch of elements, but then know in the event handler which one of my elements was clicked. I've come up with the following: MYNS.CarouselHelper.prototype.attachImgHandlers = function () { $j(".carouselItem").bind("click", this, function(e){ e.data.openCarouselImage(e) }); } I then have the following in my event handler: MYNS.CarouselHelper.prototype.openCarouselImage = function(e) { var img = e.currentTarget; // Do stuff to the image element }; Is this 'right'? It feels wrong to me as I am used to explicitly passing the element to the event handler in Prototype as I loop through an array of elements. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • explanation about prototype.js function binding code

    - by resopollution
    From: http://ejohn.org/apps/learn/#2 Function.prototype.bind = function(){ var fn = this, args = Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments), object = args.shift(); return function(){ return fn.apply(object, args.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments))); }; }; Can anyone tell me why the second return is necessary (before fn.apply)? Also, can anyone explain why args.concat is necessary? Why wouldn't it be re-written as: fn.apply(object, args) instead of return fn.apply(object, args.concat(Array.prototype.slice.call(arguments)));

    Read the article

  • Migrating from jQuery to Prototype

    - by Craig Gardner
    I'm starting to write code using Prototype coming from a jQuery background. Is there any chart that shows the prototype equivalent method to use in place of specific jQuery methods? More specifically, I'm looking for a $('#my-id').prepend('some stuff') equivalent in prototype?

    Read the article

  • What is the actual problem with a prototype based design?

    - by WindScar
    I feel like anything that can be developed using OO/functional languages can be generally made 'better' using a prototype based language, because they appaer to have the best of them all: high order functions, flexibility to simulate any OO structure, productivity (low verbosity) and scalability because of concurrency. But it seems like they are avoided for the creation of executable applications and of bigger projects in general. Why that?

    Read the article

  • Prototype hide/show

    - by Kyle Sevenoaks
    Hi, I am a Javascript/jQuery/Prototype newcomer and I have a page that has a Prototype function to get info from a database and put it into some input fields. This was made before I came to work on this site and now I've been asked to add a hide/show div function. I tried it in jQuery and there were clashes with the two frameworks, (as found in my previous question). My question now is, how would I go about building a show/hide function in Prototype? I think it will be easier to do it this way than to re-build the info grabber. The page I want to add this to is here. (the green "ny kunde" button should show the div directly below it newCustomer. Thanks. :)

    Read the article

  • Dynamically loading CSS and JavaScript using Prototype

    - by Salman A
    I have a classic ASP application that I've been constantly trying to modularize. Currently, almost all pages are divided in to two pages: an outer page that contains the layout, header, sidebar, footer an inner page that contains ASP code The outer pages use dreamweaver templates so updating layout and replicating changes is easy. The inner pages are managed by me. Now here is the problem: I had to add a lightbox to one page, I chose Lightbox 2 which requires Prototype. I ended up adding Prototype on every page, assuming that sooner or later I'll upgrade all pages, forms, ajax requests and other javascript to use Prototype. I've now added two other plugins -- Modalbox and Protofade; each with a pair of .JS and .CSS files. Since I'll be using these three plugins on specific set of pages I am wondering if I can load the required CSS and JS files dynamically. I do not want to access the document head and add include files there, I'll have to do this from inside a DIV where all ASP code is supposed to go.

    Read the article

  • Searching for Nodes with Specific Text using the Prototype Javascript Framework

    - by Alan Storm
    Does the Prototype Javascript library have a selector that's equivalent to jQuery's :contains()? If not, what would what be "The Prototype Way" to selector/filter-down a list of elements that contains a particular string. For example, using the following $$('#some_div dd a') I may get back an array of 50 or so links. I only want the links that contain the work 'home'. In jQuery I'd do this jQuery('#some_div dd a:contains('home')'); Is it possible to do something similar using Prototype? If not, is there an elegant way to filter out the array of 50 elements that gets returned.

    Read the article

  • Help porting a bit of Prototype JavaScript to jQuery

    - by ewall
    I have already implemented some AJAX pagination in my Rails app by using the example code for the will_paginate plugin--which is apparently using Prototype. But if I wanted to switch to using jQuery for future additions, I really don't want to have the Prototype stuff sitting around too (yes, I know it's possible). I haven't written a lick of JavaScript in years, let alone looked into Prototype and jQuery... so I could use some help converting this bit into jQuery-compatible syntax: document.observe("dom:loaded", function() { // the element in which we will observe all clicks and capture // ones originating from pagination links var container = $(document.body) if (container) { var img = new Image img.src = '/images/spinner.gif' function createSpinner() { return new Element('img', { src: img.src, 'class': 'spinner' }) } container.observe('click', function(e) { var el = e.element() if (el.match('.pagination a')) { el.up('.pagination').insert(createSpinner()) new Ajax.Request(el.href, { method: 'get' }) e.stop() } }) } }) Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Help with prototype object

    - by nemiss
    Hi, I am mlearning javascript and have some trouble creating an onject via prototype. I have this: <script type="text/javascript"> function myclass(a, b, c) { if (arguments.length) { this.Init(a, b, c); } } myclass.prototype.Init = function(a, b, c) { this.param1 = a; this.param2 = b; this.param3 = c; }; myclass.prototype.Print = function() { alert(this.param1 + '-' + this.param2 + '-' + this.param3); }; var myObject = myclass(3, 5, 6); myObject.Print(); </script> but I get an error on line with this.Init(a, b, c); Error: Object doesn't support this property or method

    Read the article

  • equivalent of jQuery's "load" in prototype

    - by Goro
    Hello, I am trying to find an equivalent for the following jQuery javascript: var x1 = setInterval(function() { $('#status').load("processor.php", {value:'name'} );}, 5000 ); I need to use Prototype for other applications on the page, and when I throw both jQuery and Prototype libraries in there they will not cooperate. Thank you,

    Read the article

  • Change form action with prototype

    - by xain
    Hi, how can I change a form's action with prototype ? I've seen plenty of examples with jquery using: $("#form1").attr("action","http://actionurl.com"); but haven't one with prototype. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Javascript: Enable checkboxes list when a checkbox is checked (With Prototype)

    - by BoDiE2003
    Guys, Ive been using jquery to do this, but now I need to do it with Prototype and Im little confused due lack of documentation I have 2 lists of check boxes First List: Check box 1 Check box 2 Second list: Check box x check box y check box z I need the JS code, using prototype to work like this: Second list, remains disabled unless I check one of the checkboxes of the First List. Any suggestions, or help, please! Thankyou.

    Read the article

  • How can I replicate YUI's getElementsBy using Prototype?

    - by LogicWolfe
    I'm moving some code from YUI to javascript and some of it is using YUI's YAHOO.util.Dom.getElementsBy(function). I've been reading through the prototype API docs and haven't been able to find something equivalent. It needs to be able to take an arbitrary function not just select off a CSS selector or the like. Can anyone suggest to me the best way to accomplish this in Prototype?

    Read the article

  • Prototype: Enable checkboxes list of a specific checkbox is checked

    - by BoDiE2003
    Guys, Ive been using jquery to do this, but now I need to do it with Prototype and Im little confused due lack of documentation I have 2 lists of check boxes First List: Check box 1 Check box 2 Second list: Check box x check box y check box z I need the JS code, using prototype to work like this: Second list, remains disabled unless I check one of the checkboxes of the First List. Any suggestions, or help, please! Thankyou.

    Read the article

  • jQuery Prototype conflict, alternative solutions

    - by lbolognini
    I have a problem as I'm conditionally including the Prototype-based Lightbox script for IE6 as it works better than the jQuery plugin. Of course the two libraries conflict but the official solution is not really feasible for me as i would have to replace tons of $ with the alternative no-conflict syntax. Is there any other solution for me, keeping in mind that in my case it would be easier to have Prototype work nicely with jQuery than the other way around?

    Read the article

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