Yeah, I'm currently using jQuery in noConflict mode but am looking to
share code back and forth with other groups here at work. They
develop in Prototype and my group develops in jQuery. I was hoping to
find a way to constrain Prototype to the widgets that they develop so
that I could use their
Hi,
FYI, Tobie's working on Prototype support for Google Caja[1], which is
around doing exactly the sort of thing. (Caja is Spanish for "box".)
It's not released yet, but coming soon. (And yes, "Google Caja" does
read a bit like the name of an 80's one-hit-wonder on first
glance. ;-) Less so w
Thank you T.J.
This is my corrected code with the JSON solution:
I had obviously miss understood the use of bind, also when I wrote
that code I was in a real rush and trying to fight errors so I was
trying a few things to get it to work. I have now corrected the code:
Event.observe('kindoffabri
Hi Dan,
Can you put together a small but self-contained test page and post it
to Pastie?[1]
[1] http://pastie.org
--
T.J. Crowder
tj / crowder software / com
Independent Software Engineer, consulting services available
On Mar 16, 2:44 am, Daniel Israel wrote:
> I've got a fairly complex page w
First, thanks for the reply. This seemed like it should work to
contain Prototype, but it doesn't...
$(function() {
console.log($('mySelect'));
(function() {
$.getScript('/cfgmgr/js/lib/prototype-1.6.0.3.js', function() {
console.log($('mySelect'));
I've got a fairly complex page where I'm using AJAX to get data from
the server and populate a form (in a modal box...
(http://www.wildbit.com/labs/modalbox/)
). It works fine except for the one textarea. I get the value fine
from the server (confirm in firebug), but when I set the value,
Thanks.
I'd like the refactoring to include all Function.prototype methods,
not just bind, so we have a clean and coherent src code.
Best,
Tobie
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype & script.a
On Mar 15, 8:09 am, kangax wrote:
> On Mar 15, 10:35 am, Tobie Langel wrote:
> [...]
>
> > The difficulty of abstracting your solution comes from the need for
> > the bound function to keep a reference to the original length of the
> > array so a to reset it before passing it to the original f
Hey, I recently received a bug report from a client that they were not
able to navigate our e-learning web site.
I found out that the specs they had were IE 7
and the only time this happened is on pages with collapsible /
expandable animated div's. What is happening is the iframe in our
site th
Sure... one quick and dirty way that comes to mind is to "AJAX" in the
prototype.js file (of course, using a lightweight or homebrewed Ajax
abstraction)...
(function() {
someAjaxAPI.request(pathToPrototype, onSuccess);
function onSuccess(responseText) {
eval(responseText);
//use prototype in co
Is it possible to contain prototype in a scope like:
(function() {
use prototype here
})();
cant use it here,
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this gr
Gotcha, sorry for the misunderstanding.
> Deprecating a useful API without replacing it by something at least as
> good is not a good practice imho.
We do need that separate thread. (There was more to this paragraph,
but the first sentence kinda rendered the rest of it OT!!)
-- T.J.
On Mar 15
Sorry T.J. if my last comment came across as agressive.
Just to clarify:
> You may think that it doesn't, but that's an opinion, not received
> wisdom from on high. If you want to keep supporting DOM0 handlers
> with it, fine, say that.
Deprecating a useful API without replacing it by somethin
Hey Spinn,
You can try the example i made at this link :
http://mlh.free.fr/exemples/_essai_mouseover_2.php
And get the code of the page to get inspirate of it.
Hope you'll see what you need.
Best regards.
Michel L'HUILLIER
http://mlh.free.fr
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~
Tobie:
> ...it just doesn't make sense
You may think that it doesn't, but that's an opinion, not received
wisdom from on high. If you want to keep supporting DOM0 handlers
with it, fine, say that.
> Regarding partial application in Function.prototype.bind, that's been
> part of Prototype for a
>
> What do you mean by "backwards X-browser support"?
Come on dude, really? You didn't get what I was saying there? I meant "cross
browser support, including older browsers". Even if I was wrong on the
details, I thought that phrase was fairly self explanatory... guess not.
Just like I said, I
> To re-iterate, Kangax, you _should_ be using .bindAsEventListener in your
> first case if you want to guarantee backwards X-browser support.
No. The only use case for bindAsEventListener other than partial
application is for inline event handlers in IE:
var myObj = {
doSomething: function(ev
> Isn't that what your "internal" (used with `Function.prototype`
> extensions) `update` does?
Precisely.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Prototype & script.aculo.us" group.
To post to this group, se
On Mar 15, 10:54 am, Ryan Gahl wrote:
> So, (sorry not to capture all this in a single post)...
>
> To re-iterate, Kangax, you _should_ be using .bindAsEventListener in your
> first case if you want to guarantee backwards X-browser support.
What do you mean by "backwards X-browser support"?
Jus
On Mar 15, 10:35 am, Tobie Langel wrote:
[...]
> The difficulty of abstracting your solution comes from the need for
> the bound function to keep a reference to the original length of the
> array so a to reset it before passing it to the original function.
>
> I suspect that the cleanest solution
On Mar 15, 9:06 am, Robert Kieffer wrote:
> On Mar 14, 8:24 am, kangax wrote:
>
> > Why not combine two?
>
> > ...
> > function() {
> > if (arguments.length) {
> > var ll = arguments.length;
> > args.length = l + ll;
> > while (ll--) {
> > args[l+ll] = arguments[ll];
> >
So, (sorry not to capture all this in a single post)...
To re-iterate, Kangax, you _should_ be using .bindAsEventListener in your
first case if you want to guarantee backwards X-browser support.
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Ryan Gahl wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Ryan Gahl wr
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Ryan Gahl wrote:
> What this all means is that these 2 expressions are functionally
>> identical (considering that they are called from within the same
>> execution context):
>>
>> myElement.observe('click', onClick.bind(this));
>> myElement.observe('click', onCli
>
> What this all means is that these 2 expressions are functionally
> identical (considering that they are called from within the same
> execution context):
>
> myElement.observe('click', onClick.bind(this));
> myElement.observe('click', onClick.bindAsEventListener(this));
>
FWIW, this was not al
We've discussed deprecating bindAsEventListener about half a dozen
times already, and it just doesn't make sense, for the reasons
expressed above. So there's no point in discussing this further. I
suggest this be clarified in the documentation.
Regarding partial application in Function.prototype.
On Mar 14, 8:24 am, kangax wrote:
> Why not combine two?
>
> ...
> function() {
> if (arguments.length) {
> var ll = arguments.length;
> args.length = l + ll;
> while (ll--) {
> args[l+ll] = arguments[ll];
> }
> }
> return fn.apply(context, args);}
> }
This implementa
Here's a thought: bindAsEventListener() is basically bind() where a
certain number of leading args are expected at call-time and the rest
are provided at bind-time. (Unless you use it to create DOM0-style
handlers on IE; Don't Do That, this is 2009.) So perhaps the symbol
bindAsEventListener ca
Hi,
> I'm writing an app which retrieves an RSS feed and processes it. I'd
> like to use the Prototype methods on it, but first it must be
> extended.
I'm guessing if you're dealing with RSS, you're talking about
processing XML. Someone jump on me if I'm wrong, but I don't think
Prototype curr
Hi,
> Are there any guides to the style of markup and coding that Prototype
> assumes?
Prototype doesn't assume or require any markup or particular coding
style. Just about the only thing Prototype requires is that you
declare a doctype in your document so IE behaves (vaguely) correctly.
What
I'm writing an app which retrieves an RSS feed and processes it. I'd
like to use the Prototype methods on it, but first it must be
extended. The documentation says:
extend
extend(element)
Extends element with all of the methods contained in Element.Methods
and Element.Methods.Simulated..
I'm not clear on what you're suggesting I do with the elements
inside elements -- Element#update would replace them, and if you
move the elements outside the elements it's no longer valid
HTML (as I think you meant).
I should have noted that elements with the class "toggle" are used to
open
http://www.spinnwebe.com/temp/a1/
I want the nav to appear on mouseover of the main image, and fade on
mouseout of that image. But of course when I mouseover the nav, it
fires a mouseout on the img, so it cycles. How do I ignore that
mouseout but not the one I want?
--~--~-~--~~
32 matches
Mail list logo
