Hector, I'm afraid you lost me there. I'm always eager to improve my code,
but I am having trouble figuring out what you're talking about. I *think*
you were saying that the code promotes some bad coding habit having to do
with loop iteration, but I'm not sure what that could be. The only loop in
From: Michael Geary
Just for fun, here's a primitive little cache implementation
that lets you add/remove/get items and also prune items from
the beginning of the list...
And if anyone tries to use that code for anything, beware! It has a serious
bug. (Do you see what it is?)
If anyone
Hi Mike,
I didn't analyze your code, but as I said (or maybe I was thinking of
saying it but do not) is that JavaScript, to me, a guy is extremely
strict and high software quality development practices, promotes bad
coding habits. I say that because I have already caught myself doing
stuff that
It's the only sensible way.
jQuery provides jQuery.each( obj/arr, function() ) to iterate over
arrays/objects, which boils down to using the for...in construct.
To remove properties from an object ...
eg.
delete obj.x2;
On Oct 11, 8:57 am, Pops [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this the only way to
@Michael
Snap!
On Oct 11, 9:26 am, Michael Geary [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Pops
Is this the only way to iterate through an object?
for ( x in myObject) {
}
Ultimately, yes. You can use something like $.each() on an object, but it
just runs that same for loop
From: Pops
Is this the only way to iterate through an object?
for ( x in myObject) {
}
Ultimately, yes. You can use something like $.each() on an object, but it
just runs that same for loop internally - see the source code for $.each().
and how can you remove an field in an
Thanks Mike and Wizzud.
Question:
What I wanted to use this for was my cache and to truncate old
data. I see that using a real array will allow me to use the
inherited .length property to set a new size and it will do
truncation. But since I am using an associated array, the length
property
The for iteration goes from the older ones to newer ones, so if you
want to keep newer ones (FIFO):
function pruneCache(amt) {
for (var i in cache) {
if (cache.length = amt) return;//pruned
delete cache[i];
cache.length--;
}
}
that asumes you are keeping the length
I would be very wary of assuming that the for loop goes Last In First
Out. To quote the Mozilla docs (http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/
Core_JavaScript_1.5_Reference:Statements:for...in):
A for...in loop iterates over the properties of an object in an
arbitrary order.
It may work correctly
Thanks Danny.
If associated arrays in javascript is using memory map in the RTE,
e.g., C/C++ string list map, then the key is a hash and there is no
order to it. Traversal is unpredictable and FIFO (queues), LIFO
(stacks) does not apply here.
--
HLS
On Oct 11, 6:58 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can just test it in every browser you are interested and see
what's the result, that is always done when trying to overcome browser
incompatibilities, no magic solution for everything when dealing with
browsers.
On 11 oct, 20:18, Pops [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks Danny.
If associated
And indeed, I tested this in FF, worked well... then (surprisingly?)
tested it in IE, and it worked oddly.
this was the code:
var o = {
b:1,
c:2,
d:3
};
delete o.b;
o.e = 4;
o.b = 2;
o.a = 5;
for(i in o)alert(i);
IE would put o.b back into it's place (1st).. so yes, if
You can delete properties of an object while you're running a for loop over
that object. No special tricks are required.
If you delete a property that's already been iterated (including the current
iteration), nothing special happens - the iteration continues on its merry
way. If you delete a
13 matches
Mail list logo
