Done and
done. I didn’t even include prototype or scriptaculous. Old-school window.onload
and alerts.
-Andrew Martinez
-----Original
Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Ryan Gahl
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 12:39
PM
To:
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rails-spinoffs]
functions calling functions
So you've verified in real code using the
OP's class that once in ajaxFetch, the call to "this.function2()"
works using your closure?
Your closure would work if you were just concerned with getting data into the
function, that's where this has come up before... but once in the function if
you want "this" to be the outer object, a simple closure isn't the
answer, you need to use apply.
Now, if you had defined your closure as such, it would work...
var functor = function(arg1, arg2){ curThis.ajaxFetched(arg1,
arg2, 'staticData').bind(curThis); };
Try it your way with the original poster's class, if you're right, then I'm
surprised, but I'll admit defeat...
On 5/25/06, Martinez, Andrew
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
? No it
wouldn't. I have used this in quite a few places. It statically binds to the
object reference of this. By doing var someVar = this, you take the binding
away from 'this' problems.
Try it
for yourself with real code.
-Andrew
Martinez
-----Original
Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Ryan Gahl
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:44
AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rails-spinoffs]
functions calling functions
Andrew, this won't actually work for the OP's problem. He's not
having an issue getting "this.ajaxFetched" to be called properly.
It's that once IN ajaxFetched, the call to "this.function2()" was
looking at the wrong "this"... so your code would essentially have
the same issue since you're also not "applying" the outer object
instance to the ajaxFetched function.
On 5/25/06, Martinez, Andrew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Sigh....didn't finish editing the code.
Changed the this.ajaxFetched call to my functor ...functor.
Same way to do the same thing, but uglier.
var curThis = this;
var functor = function(arg1, arg2){curThis.ajaxFetched (arg1, arg2)}
var myAjax= new Ajax.Request(
url,
{
method: 'get',
parameters: pars,
onComplete: functor
}
);
Just be careful not to change curThis and arg1/arg2 if they are variables. When
the function is called they will have the value of their last known state
before the creating function ends (binding uhh quirks).
By the same token you can also specify static information this way.
var curThis = this;
var functor = function(arg1, arg2){curThis.ajaxFetched(arg1, arg2,
'staticData')}
var myAjax= new Ajax.Request(
url,
{
method: 'get',
parameters: pars,
onComplete: functor
}
);
-Andrew Martinez
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Martinez, Andrew
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:13 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [Rails-spinoffs]
functions calling functions
Same way to do the same thing, but uglier.
var curThis = this;
var functor = function(arg1, arg2){curThis.ajaxFetched(arg1, arg2)}
var myAjax= new Ajax.Request(
url,
{
method: 'get',
parameters: pars,
onComplete: this.ajaxFetched
}
);
Just be careful not to change curThis and arg1/arg2 if they are variables. When
the function is called they will have the value of their last known state
before the creating function ends (binding uhh quirks).
By the same token you can also specify static information this way.
var curThis = this;
var functor = function(arg1, arg2){curThis.ajaxFetched(arg1, arg2,
'staticData')}
var myAjax= new Ajax.Request(
url,
{
method: 'get',
parameters: pars,
onComplete: this.ajaxFetched
}
);
-Andrew Martinez
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Jeremy Kitchen
Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 3:25 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Rails-spinoffs]
functions calling functions
<< File: ATT1071742.dat >> << File: ATT1071743.txt >>
On Wednesday 24 May 2006 23:02, Maninder, Singh wrote:
> Ryan,
>
> What's the non prototyp-ish way to handle this?
>
> What if we don't want to use bind()?
it really depends. If the " this.function2" function
doesn't rely on state
within the object, just turn it into a 'class method' and call it directly.
If it does, then you'll have to use bind.
bind is really just a fancy wrapper around apply(), so you can do it manually,
but I find bind to be much more handy :)
-Jeremy
_______________________________________________
Rails-spinoffs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
_______________________________________________
Rails-spinoffs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-spinoffs
|
