[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
Naturally I meant:
getElementPosition(descendant, parent);
... and not the other way around.
/Per
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Per Cederberg wrote:
> I think that line was used to do the following:
>
>var parent = $("one");
>var descendant = $("two");
>getElementPosition(parent, descendant);
>
> I.e, we can send another node as the relativeTo value. Not just an
> object with x and y properties.
>
> Cheers,
>
> /Per
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Amit Mendapara
> wrote:
>>
>> What does this line really intended for?
>>
>> relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
>>
>> I have removed this line and that error was gone...
>>
>> - Amit
>>
>> On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
>>> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>>>
>>>http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>>>
>>> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
>>> of black magic:
>>>
>>> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
>>> var self = MochiKit.Style;
>>> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
>>> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>>>
>>> if (!elem ||
>>> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
>>> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
>>> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
>>> return undefined;
>>> }
>>>
>>> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
>>> intention?
>>>
>>> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
>>> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
>>> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
>>> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
>>> anything here...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> /Per
>> >>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
Looked a bit deeper into this issue. Seems that the suggested change
to MochiKit.DOM.getElement() would break some tests for Signal and
DOM, since both modules contain code that assume getElement() will
just return whatever non-string object it was provided with.
I've fixed those cases I could find (r1492), but I guess this might be
an API-breaking change. So I'm holding off on the core
MochiKit.DOM.getElement() change for now.
Regarding the original issue, I think that the original code attempted
to say this (not perfect, but more understandable):
getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
var self = MochiKit.Style;
var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
var isCoordinates = function (o) {
return o != null &&
o.nodeType == null &&
typeof(o.x) == "number" &&
typeof(o.y) == "number";
}
if (typeof(elem) == "string") {
elem = dom.getElement(elem);
}
if (elem == null ||
(!isCoordinates(elem) && self.getStyle(elem, 'display') ==
'none')) {
return undefined;
}
Fixed in r1494. Thanks for the feedback!
Cheers,
/Per
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Per Cederberg wrote:
> Ah, yes... You are probably right. Thanks for the analysis!
>
> It only makes sense for getElement() to return a Node or
> null/undefined. Other return values are probably just a side-effect
> for the fast-path return for DOM nodes.
>
> But perhaps fixing this will break one or two things, like the
> getElementPosition() code mentioned... I'll check that out once I'm
> done with some other MochiKit work I'm currently doing.
>
> I still suspect the weird if-statement posted before for not being sane,
> though.
>
> Cheers,
>
> /Per
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Amit Mendapara
> wrote:
>>
>> I think,
>>
>> var elem = MochiKit.DOM.getElement({});
>>
>> should return `null` or `undefined` but it returns the argument in
>> this case. The check
>>
>> if (!elem || elem == d) {
>>return undefined;
>> }
>>
>> in getStyle fails due to this...
>>
>> - Amit
>>
>> On Dec 15, 4:34 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>>> Naturally I meant:
>>>
>>> getElementPosition(descendant, parent);
>>>
>>> ... and not the other way around.
>>>
>>> /Per
>>>
>>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Per Cederberg wrote:
>>> > I think that line was used to do the following:
>>>
>>> >var parent = $("one");
>>> >var descendant = $("two");
>>> >getElementPosition(parent, descendant);
>>>
>>> > I.e, we can send another node as the relativeTo value. Not just an
>>> > object with x and y properties.
>>>
>>> > Cheers,
>>>
>>> > /Per
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Amit Mendapara
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>> >> What does this line really intended for?
>>>
>>> >> relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
>>>
>>> >> I have removed this line and that error was gone...
>>>
>>> >> - Amit
>>>
>>> >> On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>>> >>> Hi,
>>>
>>> >>> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
>>> >>> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>>>
>>> >>>http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>>>
>>> >>> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
>>> >>> of black magic:
>>>
>>> >>> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
>>> >>> var self = MochiKit.Style;
>>> >>> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
>>> >>> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>>>
>>> >>> if (!elem ||
>>> >>> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
>>> >>> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
>>> >>> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
>>> >>> return undefined;
>>> >>> }
>>>
>>> >>> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
>>> >>> intention?
>>>
>>> >>> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
>>> >>> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
>>> >>> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
>>> >>> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
>>> >>> anything here...
>>>
>>> >>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> >>> /Per
>> >>
>>
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
What does this line really intended for?
relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
I have removed this line and that error was gone...
- Amit
On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>
> http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>
> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
> of black magic:
>
> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
> var self = MochiKit.Style;
> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>
> if (!elem ||
> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
> return undefined;
> }
>
> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
> intention?
>
> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
> anything here...
>
> Cheers,
>
> /Per
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] New implementations of MochiKit.Format.truncToFixed and roundToFixed
Due to a new set of weird rounding errors in JavaScript floating-point numbers, I opted to fully replace the MochiKit.Format.truncToFixed and roundToFixed functions with new implementations. This basically affects all of the other MochiKit.Format functions as well. The new code pass all the tests in Firefox and IE, but "here be dragons"... :-) If you use this module in your code, please double-check that everything still works as supposed in version 1.5 (r1491 or later). Let me know if you bump into any issues. Thanks, /Per --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MochiKit" group. To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
I think that line was used to do the following:
var parent = $("one");
var descendant = $("two");
getElementPosition(parent, descendant);
I.e, we can send another node as the relativeTo value. Not just an
object with x and y properties.
Cheers,
/Per
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Amit Mendapara
wrote:
>
> What does this line really intended for?
>
> relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
>
> I have removed this line and that error was gone...
>
> - Amit
>
> On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
>> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>>
>>http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>>
>> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
>> of black magic:
>>
>> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
>> var self = MochiKit.Style;
>> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
>> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>>
>> if (!elem ||
>> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
>> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
>> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
>> return undefined;
>> }
>>
>> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
>> intention?
>>
>> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
>> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
>> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
>> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
>> anything here...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> /Per
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
I think,
var elem = MochiKit.DOM.getElement({});
should return `null` or `undefined` but it returns the argument in
this case. The check
if (!elem || elem == d) {
return undefined;
}
in getStyle fails due to this...
- Amit
On Dec 15, 4:34 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
> Naturally I meant:
>
> getElementPosition(descendant, parent);
>
> ... and not the other way around.
>
> /Per
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Per Cederberg wrote:
> > I think that line was used to do the following:
>
> > var parent = $("one");
> > var descendant = $("two");
> > getElementPosition(parent, descendant);
>
> > I.e, we can send another node as the relativeTo value. Not just an
> > object with x and y properties.
>
> > Cheers,
>
> > /Per
>
> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Amit Mendapara
> > wrote:
>
> >> What does this line really intended for?
>
> >> relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
>
> >> I have removed this line and that error was gone...
>
> >> - Amit
>
> >> On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
> >>> Hi,
>
> >>> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
> >>> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>
> >>> http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>
> >>> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
> >>> of black magic:
>
> >>> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
> >>> var self = MochiKit.Style;
> >>> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
> >>> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>
> >>> if (!elem ||
> >>> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
> >>> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
> >>> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
> >>> return undefined;
> >>> }
>
> >>> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
> >>> intention?
>
> >>> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
> >>> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
> >>> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
> >>> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
> >>> anything here...
>
> >>> Cheers,
>
> >>> /Per
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
[mochikit] Re: Weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition
Ah, yes... You are probably right. Thanks for the analysis!
It only makes sense for getElement() to return a Node or
null/undefined. Other return values are probably just a side-effect
for the fast-path return for DOM nodes.
But perhaps fixing this will break one or two things, like the
getElementPosition() code mentioned... I'll check that out once I'm
done with some other MochiKit work I'm currently doing.
I still suspect the weird if-statement posted before for not being sane, though.
Cheers,
/Per
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Amit Mendapara
wrote:
>
> I think,
>
> var elem = MochiKit.DOM.getElement({});
>
> should return `null` or `undefined` but it returns the argument in
> this case. The check
>
> if (!elem || elem == d) {
>return undefined;
> }
>
> in getStyle fails due to this...
>
> - Amit
>
> On Dec 15, 4:34 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>> Naturally I meant:
>>
>> getElementPosition(descendant, parent);
>>
>> ... and not the other way around.
>>
>> /Per
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:34 PM, Per Cederberg wrote:
>> > I think that line was used to do the following:
>>
>> >var parent = $("one");
>> >var descendant = $("two");
>> >getElementPosition(parent, descendant);
>>
>> > I.e, we can send another node as the relativeTo value. Not just an
>> > object with x and y properties.
>>
>> > Cheers,
>>
>> > /Per
>>
>> > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:17 PM, Amit Mendapara
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >> What does this line really intended for?
>>
>> >> relativeTo = arguments.callee(relativeTo);
>>
>> >> I have removed this line and that error was gone...
>>
>> >> - Amit
>>
>> >> On Dec 12, 8:08 pm, "Per Cederberg" wrote:
>> >>> Hi,
>>
>> >>> I ran across a weird bug in MochiKit.Style.getElementPosition causing
>> >>> FF to throw evil C++ exceptions into the console:
>>
>> >>>http://trac.mochikit.com/ticket/332
>>
>> >>> Debugging the MochiKit code I ended up looking at the following piece
>> >>> of black magic:
>>
>> >>> getElementPosition: function (elem, /* optional */relativeTo) {
>> >>> var self = MochiKit.Style;
>> >>> var dom = MochiKit.DOM;
>> >>> elem = dom.getElement(elem);
>>
>> >>> if (!elem ||
>> >>> (!(elem.x && elem.y) &&
>> >>> (!elem.parentNode === null ||
>> >>> self.getStyle(elem, 'display') == 'none'))) {
>> >>> return undefined;
>> >>> }
>>
>> >>> Question: What does the if-statement really do? And what was the real
>> >>> intention?
>>
>> >>> It seems the getStyle() function is called even though I send in a {
>> >>> x: 0, y: 0 } object. I guess that is not the real intention.
>> >>> Especially I like the "!elem.parentNode === null" check. What does
>> >>> that even mean??? Weird that the previous test cases haven't caught
>> >>> anything here...
>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>>
>> >>> /Per
> >
>
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"MochiKit" group.
To post to this group, send email to mochikit@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
mochikit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/mochikit?hl=en
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
