Only in Mozilla Dev. Network is a function declaration explained with the following pseudoCode:
function name([param,[, param,[..., param]]]) {
[statements]
}
Is there any special significance or reason why the parameter list is represented as a nested list instead of just listing out the parameters as can be seen in any other function declaration on the Web?
Why not just show the declaration simply like:
function name(param1, param2, paramN...,) {
[statements]
}
Am I looking into this too much? Or is it just the Mozilla way of explaining the declaration?
The syntax shows when a parameter is optional
Related
I've tried to google my question but it makes me even more confused. My question is:
Here's the jQuery code:
$(document).ready(function() {
$(window).resize(function() {
if ($(this).width() < 200) {
$("p").css("color", "red");
} else {
$("p").css("color", "green");
}
});
}
Why do we write (this) and not ("this") ?
How do I know if (document) and (window) should be written with " " - and why's that?
Maybe you could link me somewhere that explains my issue. My code apparently works either way, I'm just curious about the why.
In JavaScript namespace, this is reserved [source].
The JavaScript object literal this refers to the inherited object from the present state in the current execution.
Another example of this we can see is when we are looping through an array and the object this would symbolize the current array object. You may, for example, see this.title, or this.description if we were iterating through a database array of blog posts.
this in jQuery refers to the inherited object. When we add the quotation marks, and it becomes a string, such as "this". This makes jQuery parse it as a DOM selector.
Then we are now looking for the HTML DOM selector <this>, which to my knowledge, does not actually exist in the accepted HTML syntax standards.
As otherwise stated, the concept of this will become tricky when you are working in other JavaScript environments, such as React or Angular. Within the context of a functional component, this becomes the state, such as handling user sessions.
I have a generic template in play 2.6, that I want to pass in a variable amount of HtmlContents. I've defined the template like this (including the implicit parameter I have in case that changes anything):
#(foo: String)(content: Html*)(implicit bar: Bar)
On the template side, this works fine-- I can dissect content with for and render it as I want. However, I haven't been able to figure out a clean way to invoke the variable arguments from the underlying template.
e.g, I have a view named "Baz":
#(something: String)(implicit bar: Bar)
In it, I try to invoke the template with multiple Html arguments. I've tried the following:
#template("fooString"){{123},{abc}}
and
#template("fooString")({123}, {abc})
and
#template("fooString"){{123}, {abc}})
And various other permutations, but inside of an enclosing bracket it seems to interpret everything literally as a single parameter in the HtmlContent vararg.
However, this ended up working as I intended, passing in multiple HtmlContents:
#template("fooString")(Html("123"), Html("abc"))
So that works, and I can use a triple-quoted interpolated string for a large Html block-- but it seems like there should be a cleaner way to do this, and the string interpolation is dangerous as it doesn't do html escaping.
Is there a way to do this using the { enclosed syntax? I'd like to understand more what is actually happening on an underlying level, and how play parses and generates HtmlContent in brackets.
So consider you have below template
// main.scala.html
#(title: String)(contents: Html*)
There are different ways you can call this template
Option #1
This is what you already posted in the question
#main("This is a title")(Html("abc"), Html("123"))
Options #2
#html1 = {
Hello
}
#html2 = {
<div>Tarun</div>
}
#main("This is a title")(html1, html2)
Option #3
#main("This is a title")(Html(<div>Tarun
</div>.toString), Html(<div>
Lalwani
</div>.toString))
Options #4
This is not exactly same option, but needs change in Template signature itself
#(title: String)(contents: List[String])
And then calling it like below
#main("This is a title")(List(
"""<div>
Tarun
</div>
""", """Hello"""))
Option #5
This requires code files and was already answered on another SO thread
Paul Draper's answer on Why doesn't this pass multiple HTML parameters to template
I tried to find on Primefaces Documentation but I have not found how can I customize the filter function for SelectOneMenu.
I add filterMatchMode="custom" filterFunction="#{mainRandevuBean.ilFilter()}"
But I don't know how can I write bean filterFunction.
The filter is a javascript (client-side) function. It all IS in the PrimeFaces documentation, which you should always look into first, carefully, thouroughly.
So use filterFunction="myFilter"
and create a javascript function like
function myFilter(itemLabel, filterValue) {
// return true if this label matches, false otherwise
}
Just as a sidenote: primefaces documentation doesn't say anything semantically about the parameters. It also does not mention where the label comes from (in fact, the docs mention "the item value" which is not very clear).
In fact I used the JavaScript function to debug this in order to figure out what was provided by default as a label.
function filterList(label, filter){
alert("label="+label+" and filter="+filter);
return false;
}
At first I thought it would be anything like the text inside the HTML generated for each list item. But when debugging it I saw the alert said that the label was something like my.package.SomeValueObject#123456 (which is obvously the Java object toString on each item in the list).
You need to define the itemLabel property on the selectItems which is inside the selectManyMenu to generate a proper text value used by the standard filtering mechanisme. As far as I could figure out that is the only reason why you have to put itemLabel there. In the documentation itemLabel is specified before explaining filtering which is confusing.
And as far as I know the itemValue defaults anyhow to just the object value, so I believe following from the documentation is redundant.
itemValue="#{player}"
Hope it helps anyone :.)
I resolve this problem with autocomplete component. Primefaces autocomplete component with dropdown="true" property works like one menu.
Surprisingly can't find this on google...
Can the name of a custom element (a la the Web Components set of W3C specs) contain unicode?
This HTML 5 Custom element names? says that a custom element name must begin with an ASCII character, contain a hyphen, and ANY OTHER characters. Does that mean unicode?
TL;DR This great article explains what characters are permitted in javascript. Unfortunately, those won’t work as expected with elements. At least, at the moment.
The reason is that document.registerElement which is being called on newly created custom elements, will fail:
var a = document.registerElement('a-ℵ');
//⇒ Uncaught SyntaxError: Failed to execute
// 'registerElement' on 'Document':
// Registration failed for type 'a-ℵ'.
// The type name is invalid.
That’s because registerElement tries to create internal constructor, different from generic function HTMLElement()/function HTMLUnknownElement() for registered elements:
console.log(document.registerElement('a-b'));
//⇒ function a-b() { [native code] }
I would suggest the internals of browsers are not yet ready for:
//⇒ function a-ℵ() { [native code] }
though you might easily specify:
var ℵ = function() { console.log('IT WORKS') };
ℵ();
//⇒ IT WORKS
I understand this is not exactly an answer you expected, but I hope it sheds some light.
I previously asked about what Mixins were, and have begun to get the gist of what the pattern means. But it got me wondering if there is a common pattern name for doing something like Mixins at an Object level as opposed to the Class level.
Pseudo code (in some non existent language):
Class MyClass
{
function foo()
{
print("foo")
}
}
function bar()
{
print("bar")
}
object = MyClass.new()
object.xxxx(bar)
object.bar() #output: bar
I know stuff like this can be done in several languages, in one way or another, but I'm wondering what would be the "standard" name for the functionality xxxx represents, and what is the name for this pattern, if there is one.
Thanks!
Edit: Expanding on finnsson's answer I guess something like this might be another case of this would be:
object.xxxx(OtherClass)
object.otherfoo()
Would concatenate be appropriate?
Quote: "Concatenation: Under pure prototyping, which is also referred to as concatenative prototypes..." -wikipedia
This is common in prototype-based programming languages. I belive it's called "import" in ruby but it's some time since I last programmed ruby so I'm not sure.
In js/ruby you would write
object.bar = bar;
object.bar() // output: bar
and than it's no real pattern, since it's just an assignment (o.bar = bar) making perfect sense in a prototype-based language. I guess xxxx in your example could be called prototype or something similar (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-based_programming where a language calles this proto).