*sigh* I think I need more coffee. And a vacation.
The _other_ thing I meant to mention is that I find it handy to put
wrappers around the Ajax.Request (and similar) calls in Prototype. I
keep meaning to write this up properly because I know the ajax stuff
is being redesigned before too long, but I find that addng a "context"
parameter really improves usability, and so I provide one via an
adapter. (There are a few other things I do in the adapter which are
more application specific.) So for me that ajax call wouldn't require
a bind at all, it would look something like this:
niftyAjaxWrapperFunctionName(_location(), {
method: 'get',
context: this,
parameters: this.getParams(),
onOkay: updateComplete
});
...where updateComplete is not bound because it doesn't have to be,
the wrapper triggers the onOkay function using the given context. I
find that this makes my life a lot simpler. I hardly ever forget the
context parameter.
(And before I forgot, I went and filed an enh. req.:
https://prototype.lighthouseapp.com/projects/8886-prototype/tickets/1030)
-- T.J.
On Apr 11, 8:30 am, "T.J. Crowder" <t...@crowdersoftware.com> wrote:
> Sorry, meant to say: I also didn't see anything wrong with using a
> variable to refer to `this` and not using #bind. If you do that,
> though, I'd recommend using the same variable name every time you do
> this, throughout all of your classes. The one I use is `self` because
> lots of people seem to use it for this (no pun). (Another one you see
> sometimes is `that`, but for me, that's just completely wrong [again,
> no pun].)
>
> -- T.J. :-)
>
> On Apr 11, 7:20 am, "T.J. Crowder" <t...@crowdersoftware.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hi,
>
> > Off-the-cuff, I'd probably use two binds and one local (this is
> > totally off-the-cuff, and apologies if I've messed something up. Also,
> > we have slightly different coding styles and while I tried to stick to
> > what I inferred from what I saw, it's probably ended up a mish-mash):
>
> >http://pastie.org/913777 (update1.js; also pasted at the end of this
> > message)
>
> > I *might* grab the bound updateComplete function to a local variable
> > rather than re-binding it on every update, I think it may depend on my
> > mood. :-) (I didn't in the above, and of course as I write this I
> > think I should have.)
>
> > For this, I probably wouldn't use a periodical executer, either,
> > because of all the state flags required. I'd probably go with chained
> > execution:
>
> >http://pastie.org/913778 (update2.js; also pasted at end of message)
>
> > ...but note that that change changes the timing; 'frequency' becomes
> > the time between the end of one update and the start of the next,
> > rather than the time between the start of updates (barring an update
> > taking longer than the time, in which case the earlier code skipped
> > that update entirely).
>
> > *Totally* FWIW.
>
> > Oh, and I'm a named function guy (I notice you're using an anonymous
> > function for your `autoUpdate` property); here's
> > why:http://blog.niftysnippets.org/2010/03/anonymouses-anonymous.html
>
> > Happy coding,
>
> > -- T.J. :-)
>
> > **** update1.js:
> > autoUpdate: function(was_in_progress) {
>
> > // TJC: One of the few situations where I find multiple
> > exits maintainable; early shortcutting
> > if (this.periodical_executer.updater) {
> > alert('There is a request currently in progress.
> > Please try again later or refresh the page.');
> > return false; // TJC: Side note, the function
> > appears to return false (here) or undefined (main case) - subtle! ;-)
> > }
>
> > var frequency = $F('page_updater_frequency');
> > this.periodical_executer.updater = new
> > PeriodicalExecuter(doUpdate.bind(this), frequency);
>
> > // TJC: To me, breaking this out in a named function
> > improves clarity
> > function doUpdate() {
> > if (!this.periodical_executer.request_in_progress) {
> > this.params = {'authenticity_token':
> > Utilities.getAuthToken(),
> > 'was_in_progress':
> > was_in_progress};
> > this.periodical_executer.request_in_progress =
> > true;
> > new Ajax.Request(_location(), {
> > method: 'get',
> > parameters: this.getParams(),
> > onComplete: updateComplete.bind(this)
> > });
> > }
> > }
>
> > // TJC: Again, the named function (for me) immproves
> > clarity
> > function updateComplete(r) {
> > this.periodical_executer.request_in_progress = false;
> > var json = Utilities.updateElements(r);
> > if (json.js_data && json.js_data.should_stop) {
> > this.periodical_executer.updater.stop();
> > var effected = this.periodical_executer.glowing;
> > if (effected) {
> > // stop glowing effect
> > effected.stopGlow();
> > }
> > this.periodical_executer = {};
> > }
> > else {
> > // typewriter effect for updated info
> > // TJC: Since it's just these IDs we need in the
> > anon function below, grab them
> > var tw_ids = this.type_writer_ids;
> > var for_typewriter =
> > json.partials.select(function(e) { return twids.include(e.id); });
> > for_typewriter.each(function(e) {
> > _typeWriter(e.id);
> > })
> > }
> > }
> > }
>
> > *** update2.js:
> > autoUpdate: function(was_in_progress) {
>
> > // Short-circuit if already running
> > if (this.periodical_executer.updating) {
> > alert('There is a request currently in progress.
> > Please try again later or refresh the page.');
> > return;
> > }
>
> > // Setup
> > this.periodical_executer.updating true;
> > var frequency = $F('page_updater_frequency');
> > var updateComplete = updateCompleteImpl.bind(this);
> > var doUpdate = doUpdateImpl.bind(this);
>
> > // Kick off the process
> > doUpdate(); // Or: doUpdate.delay(frequency);
>
> > // Process an update
> > function doUpdateImpl() {
> > this.params = {'authenticity_token':
> > Utilities.getAuthToken(),
> > 'was_in_progress': was_in_progress};
> > new Ajax.Request(_location(), {
> > method: 'get',
> > parameters: this.getParams(),
> > onComplete: updateComplete
> > });
> > }
>
> > // Process update completion
> > function updateCompleteImpl(r) {
> > var json = Utilities.updateElements(r);
> > if (json.js_data && json.js_data.should_stop) {
> > var effected = this.periodical_executer.glowing;
> > if (effected) {
> > // stop glowing effect
> > effected.stopGlow();
> > }
> > this.periodical_executer = {};
> > }
> > else {
> > // typewriter effect for updated info
> > var tw_ids = this.type_writer_ids;
> > var for_typewriter =
> > json.partials.select(function(e) { return twids.include(e.id); });
> > for_typewriter.each(function(e) {
> > _typeWriter(e.id);
> > })
>
> > // Kick off next update
> > doUpdate.delay(frequency);
> > }
> > }
> > }
>
> > On Apr 11, 5:28 am, patrick <patrick99...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Hi,
>
> > > This is one of my more 'complicated' methods that just seem like
> > > using .bind(this) at the end of the inner functions would make the
> > > code read more confusing.. I believe I have some other methods
> > > somewhere that actually pass functions as params inside those
> > > beforeCreate, afterFinish blocks, and they too would require .bind --
> > > and at the point it just gets really ugly...
>
> > > autoUpdate: function(was_in_progress) {
> > > var frequency = $F('page_updater_frequency');
> > > var admin_table = this;
>
> > > if (!this.periodical_executer.updater) {
> > > admin_table.periodical_executer.updater =
> > > new
> > > PeriodicalExecuter(function() {
> > > if
> > > (!admin_table.periodical_executer.request_in_progress) {
> > > admin_table.params =
> > > {'authenticity_token':
> > > Utilities.getAuthToken(),
> > >
> > > 'was_in_progress': was_in_progress};
>
> > > new
> > > Ajax.Request(_location(), {
> > > method: 'get',
> > > parameters:
> > > admin_table.getParams(),
> > > onCreate:
> > > function() {
> > >
> > > admin_table.periodical_executer.request_in_progress = true;
> > > },
> > > onComplete:
> > > function(r) {
> > >
> > > admin_table.periodical_executer.request_in_progress = false;
> > > var json
> > > = Utilities.updateElements(r);
> > > ...
>
> read more »
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this group, send email to prototype-scriptacul...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
prototype-scriptaculous+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/prototype-scriptaculous?hl=en.
