[Proto-Scripty] Re: Event.observe
Brent,
What about the variety of suggestions in your previous thread? (Also,
why start a new thread when you already have one going on this?)
IIRC, the consensus in the previous thread was that A) It's not
Prototype, and B) It may relate to some session management or some
such on the server.
This may be OT, but from the quoted code I'm a bit surprised that it
works reliably across browsers in the first place. Some browsers need
a moment after an update before you can reliably access the new
elements via the DOM. So I'd probably make the onSuccess handler do
both the loading and the attaching, and attach after a Function#defer
[1], like this:
onSuccess: function(transport) {
loadSelectsForm(transport);
attachSelectsFormObservers.defer();
}
(and no onComplete at all) ...or just put the deferred call to
attachSelectsFormObservers in loadSelectsForm since I assume you
always want to do it. But again, this observation isn't about
observers getting lost after a pause, it's about their not getting
attached at all *sometimes* on some browsers, which isn't the issue
you're reporting so again, apologies if it's OT. (Unless the entire
page has a timed refresh?) Still, though, worth a try.
[1] http://prototypejs.org/api/function/defer
FWIW,
--
T.J. Crowder
tj / crowder software / com
Independent Software Engineer, consulting services available
On Apr 29, 7:59 pm, BrentNicholas brentnicho...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
So I posted about this before but am still having troubles with
Event.observe flaking out on me after a period of time.
Here's the situation:
The page runs and init's the app with:
document.observe(dom:loaded, init);
init() fires off: getSelectsForm()
As you can see (below) it loads a page and attaches some observers,
the page loaded only has three buttons on it (as seen in the
Event.observe code). They are not of the same names or id's, but do
share the same css class names. Nothing else is loaded.
Now if I click any button right away things work just fine (List Page,
Add Page). If I wait about 5 minutes (not pressing any buttons first
after load) the 'buttonGetProjectsList' will not seem to fire the
'getProjectsList' function as registered through the observer. However
the button 'buttonAddProjectForm' will fire off the 'addProject'
function. Even if you start using the page right away (everything
works), then wait 5 minutes, the list button will not work but the
others will.
The pages loaded by these button do not have any elements of the same
name or id on them that the ''dsp_ProjSelects.cfm' file had. So there
should not be any naming conflicts.
Any thoughts on this? I've taken the application and stripped in down
to just what's needed in a test area and I'm still getting the
trouble.
function getSelectsForm()
{
new Ajax.Request('dsp_ProjSelects.cfm?'+cfSession,
{
method: 'get',
onSuccess: loadSelectsForm,
onComplete: attachSelectsFormObservers,
onFailure: function(r) {
throw new Error( r.statusText );
}
}
);
}
function loadSelectsForm(transport)
{
var htmlBlock = transport.responseText;
Element.update(idSelectsDIV,htmlBlock);
Form.focusFirstElement('SELECT_FORM');
}
function attachSelectsFormObservers()
{
Event.observe('buttonGetProjectsList','click', getProjectsList,
false);
Event.observe('buttonAddProjectForm','click', addProject, false);
Event.observe('buttonClearForm','click', clearSelectsForm, false);
}
Also, environment:
Win XP (all patches)
IE 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp.080413-2111
Thanks for your time and effort.
Brent
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] git clone failure for scriptaculous.
Hi. Trying to get the latest git on windows using Cygwin. git clone git://github.com/madrobby/scriptaculous.git Initialized empty Git repository in /cygdrive/d/Personal Files/Downloads/Software/Programming/Javascript/scriptaculous/.git/ remote: Counting objects: 3401, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (763/763), done. fatal: read error on input: Bad address99 KiB | 69 KiB/s fatal: index-pack failed git works fine for Prototype. Any ideas? Regards, Richard. -- - Richard Quadling Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498r=213474731 Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: git clone failure for scriptaculous.
Richard Quadling wrote: Hi. Trying to get the latest git on windows using Cygwin. git clone git://github.com/madrobby/scriptaculous.git Initialized empty Git repository in /cygdrive/d/Personal Files/Downloads/Software/Programming/Javascript/scriptaculous/.git/ remote: Counting objects: 3401, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (763/763), done. fatal: read error on input: Bad address99 KiB | 69 KiB/s fatal: index-pack failed git works fine for Prototype. Any ideas? Regards, Richard. k...@katz-laptop:~/sandbox/github$ git clone git://github.com/madrobby/scriptaculous.git Initialized empty Git repository in /home/katz/sandbox/github/scriptaculous/.git/ remote: Counting objects: 3401, done. remote: Compressing objects: 100% (763/763), done. remote: Total 3401 (delta 2555), reused 3401 (delta 2555) Receiving objects: 100% (3401/3401), 700.26 KiB | 41 KiB/s, done. Resolving deltas: 100% (2555/2555), done. k...@katz-laptop:~/sandbox/github$ Worked fine for me just now. (But I use Ubuntu 8.10) Maybe try again? If it worked fine for me. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Well, actually, my managers are pushing for self-contained javascript
code (trying to get rid of all the library calls, which isn't
necessarily a good idea, but I have to abide).
So I ended up using a DOM-compliant version using createElement,
createTextNode and appendChild.
But I'll make sure to give that piece of code of yours a spin.
Thanks a lot.
On Apr 29, 3:16 pm, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Just sort of curious ... of all the convenience that prototype offers,
why is the only method you need is Element.update()?
Anyway, try this...
(function() {
function _$(args) {
this.elements = [];
for (var i = 0, len = args.length; i len; ++i) {
if (typeof args[i] == 'string') {
this.elements.push( document.getElementById(args[i]) );
}
}
}
_$.prototype = {
update: function() {
this.elements[0].innerHTML = arguments[0];
return this;
}
};
window.$ = function() {
return new _$(arguments);
};
})();
And a fragment to drop into a body...
p id=p_content
This is some content that starts in a lt;pgt;
/p
div id=div_content
This is some content that starts in a lt;divgt;
/div
script
window.onload = function () {
$('p_content').update('test');
$('div_content').update('test');};
/script
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com wrote:
That would indeed be another interesting way of doing it. The only
problem is that javascript is often used in environments where
filesize is critical. In my case, I only use ONE function from the
library, because I've found it to be th best way to achieve what I
want to do: Element.update.
But because I'm unable to sort the source code out, I have to either:
Ditch Prototype altogether (which I don't really want to do)
OR
Make use of the whole library, which is a no-go for me as the minified
+gzip version still weighs a solid 25kB (which isn't much, but still
way too much for our needs).
What bothers me here is the one-size-fits-all mentality, but
complaining about it sure is easy when I'm not providing any code to
fix the problem, I know it is, but still it bothers me that I'll have
to end up not using update (which is a fantastic piece of code, like
the rest of the library) just because it's so deeply intertwined with
the rest of the codebase.
What I was hinting at is something akin to what jqueryUI has on
http://jqueryui.com/downloadbut even more fine-grained (at function
level if possible).
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Hi Walter, There was a project getting started late last year called pulpjs that was aiming at this problem. It's sort of a port of Prototype with the following goals: no global namespace pollution, no extensions of native prototypes, and everything is modular and non-dependent. Have a look at their download builder for a hint of what I mean:http://pulpjs.org/downloads/ This is exactly what I wanted. Unfortunately I trust Prototype's namebrand and the quality it provides me. I wish that Prototype developers will be headed that way in the future, that would definitely provide coders much-needed flexibility. Cause really it pains me to have to drop Prototype every time because I can't for the life of me get it trimmed down under 20kB. Thanks a lot for the link anyway. Note that this is Prototype-like, but not a drop-in replacement. Walter On Apr 29, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Bertrand wrote: That would indeed be another interesting way of doing it. The only problem is that javascript is often used in environments where filesize is critical. In my case, I only use ONE function from the library, because I've found it to be th best way to achieve what I want to do: Element.update. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Using this.arrayname to add data to an array not working
Hi, Yes I found some good info by Mr Crockford and friends a few weeks ago. I was looking up some info on advanced AJAX security techniques. Found these pages: http://www.webdirections.org/resources/douglas-crockford-ajax-security/ Some interesting presentation slides... and from there a link to: http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/001175.html Unfortunatly I wont be buying any more books untill I get a job. Have an Interview with a 'recruiting crowd' today [friday]. Fingers crossed.. I have now replaced the XML in the Q and A app with JSON, and, added caching for the fetched q and a sets. Works like a dream. Any thoughts yet on why the bind() function won't work within the Ajax.Request?? Not important, just curious.. Mabye its an unexpected bug in the prototype AJAX implementation? Is there another group/list where that question might be more appropriate? Thanks Again! Gilbert R.. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Because there's a reason why Prototype, jQuery and the likes have such success. It lies in the fact that the developers are very talented and provide good code. Unfortunately, I'm kind of new to the whole javascript scene and I don't know how to handle all the cross-browser oddities, the corner cases, etc. So yeah sure I theoretically *could* code an update function. But now would it be that good? Don't think so... Also why reinvent the wheel when there are libraries around? On Apr 30, 8:48 am, Alex McAuley webmas...@thecarmarketplace.com wrote: why cant you code your own insert function its not that hard ... You can probably do it in about 15 lines or so.. Alex - Original Message - From: Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com To: Prototype script.aculo.us prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:47 PM Subject: [Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase Hi Walter, There was a project getting started late last year called pulpjs that was aiming at this problem. It's sort of a port of Prototype with the following goals: no global namespace pollution, no extensions of native prototypes, and everything is modular and non-dependent. Have a look at their download builder for a hint of what I mean:http://pulpjs.org/downloads/ This is exactly what I wanted. Unfortunately I trust Prototype's namebrand and the quality it provides me. I wish that Prototype developers will be headed that way in the future, that would definitely provide coders much-needed flexibility. Cause really it pains me to have to drop Prototype every time because I can't for the life of me get it trimmed down under 20kB. Thanks a lot for the link anyway. Note that this is Prototype-like, but not a drop-in replacement. Walter On Apr 29, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Bertrand wrote: That would indeed be another interesting way of doing it. The only problem is that javascript is often used in environments where filesize is critical. In my case, I only use ONE function from the library, because I've found it to be th best way to achieve what I want to do: Element.update. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
At very least the code i gave you will allow you to clean up your own
code by subbing document.getElementById() with the $() and i'd say its
pretty damn small
Rick
On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com wrote:
Well, actually, my managers are pushing for self-contained javascript
code (trying to get rid of all the library calls, which isn't
necessarily a good idea, but I have to abide).
So I ended up using a DOM-compliant version using createElement,
createTextNode and appendChild.
But I'll make sure to give that piece of code of yours a spin.
Thanks a lot.
On Apr 29, 3:16 pm, Rick Waldron waldron.r...@gmail.com wrote:
Just sort of curious ... of all the convenience that prototype offers,
why is the only method you need is Element.update()?
Anyway, try this...
(function() {
function _$(args) {
this.elements = [];
for (var i = 0, len = args.length; i len; ++i) {
if (typeof args[i] == 'string') {
this.elements.push( document.getElementById(args[i]) );
}
}
}
_$.prototype = {
update: function() {
this.elements[0].innerHTML = arguments[0];
return this;
}
};
window.$ = function() {
return new _$(arguments);
};
})();
And a fragment to drop into a body...
p id=p_content
This is some content that starts in a lt;pgt;
/p
div id=div_content
This is some content that starts in a lt;divgt;
/div
script
window.onload = function () {
$('p_content').update('test');
$('div_content').update('test');};
/script
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 4:33 PM, Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com wrote:
That would indeed be another interesting way of doing it. The only
problem is that javascript is often used in environments where
filesize is critical. In my case, I only use ONE function from the
library, because I've found it to be th best way to achieve what I
want to do: Element.update.
But because I'm unable to sort the source code out, I have to either:
Ditch Prototype altogether (which I don't really want to do)
OR
Make use of the whole library, which is a no-go for me as the minified
+gzip version still weighs a solid 25kB (which isn't much, but still
way too much for our needs).
What bothers me here is the one-size-fits-all mentality, but
complaining about it sure is easy when I'm not providing any code to
fix the problem, I know it is, but still it bothers me that I'll have
to end up not using update (which is a fantastic piece of code, like
the rest of the library) just because it's so deeply intertwined with
the rest of the codebase.
What I was hinting at is something akin to what jqueryUI has on
http://jqueryui.com/downloadbut even more fine-grained (at function
level if possible).
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Why would it not be that good Insert takes 2 arguments and 1 of those
arguments has 4 possibilities
- Following is prototypes version of it. and if you know that you are
always going to give it VALID HTML then you can strip alot of it out
insert: function(element, insertions) {
element = $(element);
if (Object.isString(insertions) || Object.isNumber(insertions) ||
Object.isElement(insertions) || (insertions (insertions.toElement
|| insertions.toHTML)))
insertions = {bottom:insertions};
var content, insert, tagName, childNodes;
for (var position in insertions) {
content = insertions[position];
position = position.toLowerCase();
insert = Element._insertionTranslations[position];
if (content content.toElement) content = content.toElement();
if (Object.isElement(content)) {
insert(element, content);
continue;
}
content = Object.toHTML(content);
tagName = ((position == 'before' || position == 'after')
? element.parentNode : element).tagName.toUpperCase();
childNodes = Element._getContentFromAnonymousElement(tagName,
content.stripScripts());
if (position == 'top' || position == 'after') childNodes.reverse();
childNodes.each(insert.curry(element));
content.evalScripts.bind(content).defer();
}
return element;
},
- Original Message -
From: Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com
To: Prototype script.aculo.us prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:54 PM
Subject: [Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Because there's a reason why Prototype, jQuery and the likes have such
success. It lies in the fact that the developers are very talented and
provide good code. Unfortunately, I'm kind of new to the whole
javascript scene and I don't know how to handle all the cross-browser
oddities, the corner cases, etc.
So yeah sure I theoretically *could* code an update function. But now
would it be that good? Don't think so...
Also why reinvent the wheel when there are libraries around?
On Apr 30, 8:48 am, Alex McAuley webmas...@thecarmarketplace.com
wrote:
why cant you code your own insert function its not that hard ...
You can probably do it in about 15 lines or so..
Alex
- Original Message -
From: Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com
To: Prototype script.aculo.us
prototype-scriptaculous@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 4:47 PM
Subject: [Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
Hi Walter,
There was a project getting started late last year called pulpjs that
was aiming at this problem. It's sort of a port of Prototype with the
following goals: no global namespace pollution, no extensions of
native prototypes, and everything is modular and non-dependent. Have a
look at their download builder for a hint of what I
mean:http://pulpjs.org/downloads/
This is exactly what I wanted. Unfortunately I trust Prototype's
namebrand and the quality it provides me. I wish that Prototype
developers will be headed that way in the future, that would
definitely provide coders much-needed flexibility. Cause really it
pains me to have to drop Prototype every time because I can't for the
life of me get it trimmed down under 20kB.
Thanks a lot for the link anyway.
Note that this is Prototype-like, but not a drop-in replacement.
Walter
On Apr 29, 2009, at 4:33 PM, Bertrand wrote:
That would indeed be another interesting way of doing it. The only
problem is that javascript is often used in environments where
filesize is critical. In my case, I only use ONE function from the
library, because I've found it to be th best way to achieve what I
want to do: Element.update.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Ajax.Autocompleter problem.
Hi Sharon!
Well... I did a test, Ajax.Autocompleter works fine if is executed in the
main page... my problem appears when I load a new page inside a div (ajax
call) with the Ajax.Autocompleter... the ul list is showed below the input
field, but when I click one of the options, nothing happen and this massege
is showed for the Firebug:
Thank!
NB
2009/4/29 G. Sharon Yang okghy...@gmail.com
Are you sure you defined corresponding id for both textfield and the
div, as in 'new Ajax.Autocompleter(id_of_text_field,
id_of_div_to_populate, url, options)'?
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Nahuel Bulian nbul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there.
I'm trying to use the Script.aculo.us Ajax.Autocompleter, I can see the
list
returned by mi php script, but when I click one of the result nothing
happen... and the Firebug show me this:
$(element) is undefined
[Break on this error] return $A($(element).childNodes).collect(
function(node) {
Anybody know what could be happen?
Thank Nonox from Argentian!
--
Saludos
NB.
MSN: nbul...@gmail.com
GTalk: nbul...@gmail.com
Antes de imprimir, pensá en el medio ambiente.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
--
Saludos
NB.
MSN: nbul...@gmail.com
GTalk: nbul...@gmail.com
Antes de imprimir, pensá en el medio ambiente.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Ajax.Autocompleter problem.
YES!
I've solved the issue!
Before call Ajax.Autocompleter I run this:
new Insertion.Before('update', 'input type=text id=id_search
name=search autocomplete=off value= /');
And everything works fine!
Thanks to push me to think, sometimes talking about the problem you can
think in it in another way.
NB.
2009/4/30 Nahuel Bulian nbul...@gmail.com
Hi Sharon!
Well... I did a test, Ajax.Autocompleter works fine if is executed in the
main page... my problem appears when I load a new page inside a div (ajax
call) with the Ajax.Autocompleter... the ul list is showed below the input
field, but when I click one of the options, nothing happen and this massege
is showed for the Firebug:
Thank!
NB
2009/4/29 G. Sharon Yang okghy...@gmail.com
Are you sure you defined corresponding id for both textfield and the
div, as in 'new Ajax.Autocompleter(id_of_text_field,
id_of_div_to_populate, url, options)'?
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Nahuel Bulian nbul...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi there.
I'm trying to use the Script.aculo.us Ajax.Autocompleter, I can see the
list
returned by mi php script, but when I click one of the result nothing
happen... and the Firebug show me this:
$(element) is undefined
[Break on this error] return $A($(element).childNodes).collect(
function(node) {
Anybody know what could be happen?
Thank Nonox from Argentian!
--
Saludos
NB.
MSN: nbul...@gmail.com
GTalk: nbul...@gmail.com
Antes de imprimir, pensá en el medio ambiente.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
--
Saludos
NB.
MSN: nbul...@gmail.com
GTalk: nbul...@gmail.com
Antes de imprimir, pensá en el medio ambiente.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
--
Saludos
NB.
MSN: nbul...@gmail.com
GTalk: nbul...@gmail.com
Antes de imprimir, pensá en el medio ambiente.
Before printing, think about the environment.
Avant d'imprimer, pensez à l'environnement.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Sortable lists
I thought we were discussing the Prototype and Scriptaculous framework..what is Mochikit and how is it related to Proto-Scripty? On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:47 PM, WLQ maybe...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks man! You've saved a lot of headache trouble! Thanks, Bruno +1 from Yan :) --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: 1.6.1_rc2 checkDeficiency('applet') issue
We're getting the same problem, it's not consistently happening but some pages are more likely to trigger it than others. I tried some basic debugging (basic is an understatement) and the following are both TRUE: HTMLOBJECTELEMENT_PROTOTYPE_BUGGY HTMLAPPLETELEMENT_PROTOTYPE_BUGGY I am happy to try any suggestions. Thanks --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Sortable lists
In his initial message he said that MochiKit uses scriptaculous for this type of thing, so it is exactly the same. Using Sortable.create() instead of MochiKit.Sortable.Sortable.create() looks correct to me at any rate, though I've never tested any of this. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Extracting methods from codebase
On Apr 30, 11:54 am, Bertrand bertrand.char...@gmail.com wrote: Because there's a reason why Prototype, jQuery and the likes have such success. It lies in the fact that the developers are very talented and provide good code. Unfortunately, I'm kind of new to the whole Success doesn't always mean quality. Quality is often far from the main driving force. When it comes to Javascript libraries, ease of use, documentation quality and community play much bigger role in library's success than the quality of its code. Also don't forget that libraries that's being around for a (relatively) long time carry a burden of back-compatibility; If something is known to cause problems or performs in not the most efficient way, it's not always (if ever) possible to *just get rid of it*. Prototype.js is also designed in such way that many of its internals are tightly coupled and rely on each other. This means that it won't be easy to just cut `insert` method out of the source; you would need to take care of all the dependencies and branches that it uses. [...] -- kangax --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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-scriptaculous@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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[Proto-Scripty] Re: Effect.Appear doesn't work when in queue
thanks for the reply. i removed the quotes from the duration but it
still does not work.
On Apr 26, 12:38 pm, Diodeus diod...@gmail.com wrote:
function barcodeFlyToSimLeft(){
new Effect.Move('barcodeLeft',{x: -350, y: 200, mode: 'relative'});
new Effect.Shrink('barcodeLeft',{direction: 'center', queue: 'end',
afterFinish: function(){Barcode('043396097742');}});
new Effect.Appear('barcodeLeft',{x: 0, y:0, duration: '1.0', queue:
'end'});
return false;
}
Duration should be numeric, not a string.
On Apr 24, 5:26 pm,alpineedge3gmarzl...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I'm running an effect chain: move, shrink, then appear. The appear
effect doesn't fade in. rather, it just becomes visible with 100%
opacity.
The scripts are controlling the barcode boxes on the homepage
ofwww.fastpricecheck.com.
Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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-scriptaculous@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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
