Why doesn't this work?
var spans = $();
var elem = document.getElementById('someId');
spans.add(elem);
What is the proper way to start off with an empty collection and add elements to it?
I want to loop through a collection of ids and find the element on the page and add it to the matched set.
Quoting from the jQuery website:
Given a jQuery object that represents a set of DOM elements, the .add() method constructs a new jQuery object from the union of those elements and the ones passed into the method.
Hence, when you do .add() it will not save the added elements, you would have to explicitly assign the element to the newly created object i.e
var $elements = $('.elements');
$elements = $elements.add($('#anotherelement'));
The .add() method returns a new jQuery object, so you'd need to overwrite the old one:
spans = spans.add( elem );
...or since you're adding DOM elements, you can modify the existing jQuery object with .push().
spans.push( elem );
EDIT: Changed .pushStack() to .push(), though I don't know if .push() is officially supported.
You could use .pushStack() to add a collection though.
spans = spans.pushStack( [elem] );
or
spans = spans.pushStack( document.getElementsByTagName('div') );
I guess I don't get what you're asking. If you have an element and you want to add it to a collection, you just use the .add() method just like you've already shown. What confuses some is that this returns a new jQuery object so you would do it like this:
var spans = $();
var elem = document.getElementById('someId');
spans = spans.add(elem);
Of course, something like this would be shorter:
var spans = $();
spans = spans.add('#someId');
And, of course, you don't have to start with an empty object. You would just start with:
var spans = $('#someId');
If you're looking to push or add items selected from a jQuery object, you could also do this:
var $els = $(),
$someEls = $(".some-els");
$els.push.apply($els, $someEls);
Just another way to do it.
What you actually want to do is use jQuery to it's full potential. You can use selectors to grab and create the collection right away. Your three lines above becomes one line:
var spans = $('#someId');
to add more ids to the collection, you can separate them with commas:
var spans = $('#someId1, #someid2, #someid3');
There may be better ways to do what you're trying, but if you just want to create an empty jQuery object, use this:
var $foo = $([]);
Edit: I should clarify - your code actually should work, unless you're using an older version of jQuery, in which case $() would create a collection containing the document object. In newer versions, however, there's nothing wrong with that. The code snippet I pasted above is just something that should work in older versions and newer versions of jQuery.
Edit 2: In response to this portion of the question: "I want to loop through a collection of ids and find the element on the page and add it to the matched set", the following code might be useful:
var ids = ['foo', 'bar', 'baz'],
selector = $.map(ids, function(i, id) {
return '#' + id;
}).join(','),
$collection = $(selector);
While this doesn't directly answer the question of "how to append to an existing jQuery selection", I have a work-around for this particular use-case.
You can pass an array of DOM elements to jQuery, and it will create a jQuery selection out of them.
var spansArray = [];
var elem = document.getElementById('someId');
spansArray.push(elem);
var spans = $(spansArray);
I can't think of any reason why you would need to add each element to the jQuery selection one-at-a-time, as opposed to all-at-once, so this should be a "drop-in-replacement" for your use case. In theory, this must also prove more efficient, as jQuery's .add() is ultimately just calling .push() on some array behind the scenes.
Try
var spans = $("<span />");
var elem = $("#someId").html();
spans.append(elem).appendTo('#someAnotherId');
instead
The reason your code doesn't work is because add does not change the collection, it returns a new jQuery object with the new elements in it. If you wanted, you could instead say spans = spans.add(elem);, but what you're doing is unnecessary: the beauty of jQuery is that it makes this sort of imperative programming unnecessary. Look at helloandre's answer for a much easier way to accomplish your goal.
It's like the following, if this makes sense:
var x = [1, 2, 3];
x.concat(4);
console.log(x); // [1, 2, 3] -- concat does not mutate the original array
Related
(Deleted my old question to simplify it. )
I enter data in a table, I then want to make an exact duplicate of that data in a new item/record/row*.
*not sure the proper term.
Is there any way to accomplish this?
Sorry for the slow response. Here is what you should do:
Add a "copy" button in the row. In the onClick on that button, add this code:
var createDataSource = widget.datasource.modes.create;
var rowDataSource = widget.datasource;
createDataSource.item.foo = rowDataSource.item.foo;
createDataSource.item.bar = rowDataSource.item.bar;
// And so on for each field
createDataSource.createItem();
You could probably make sure of javascript for-in to loop through all the properties of the item in so you don't have to manually specify each record, but I didn't have time to experiment with this.
Edit:
The above code won't show the copied record in the list immediately, because I used row's create data source, instead of the lists create data source. Try this instead:
var rowDataSource = widget.datasource;
// Instead of using the row datasource for create, explicitly use the data source of your list.
var listDatasource = app.datasources.NameOfYourListsDataSource;
var createDataSource = listDatasource.modes.create;
createDataSource.item.foo = rowDataSource.item.foo;
createDataSource.item.bar = rowDataSource.item.bar;
// And so on for each field
createDataSource.createItem();
In our project we are using Ractive together with Backbone.
Backbone.View has a "setElement" method, that basically sets the el property of a Backbone.View, thus allowing to attach the View to a different element of the DOM.
I was wondering if there is a similar functionality for a Ractive object.
Simply changing the el property of a Ractive object doesn't do the trick.
var oRactive = new Ractive(
{
"data": someData,
"el": someDomElement,
"template": someTemplate
});
// ... after doing some other stuff we'd like to set oRactive do a different el
// this.doesn't do the trick
oRactive.el = someOtherDomElement;
// this puts the renderedHTML in our DOM element but binding doesn't work
$(someOtherDomElement).html(oRactive.renderedHTML());
I'm not really surprised that the above doesn't work. Question is: Is there a way to make it work or is it generally impossible?
I am aware that I could just append oRactive.el to "someOtherDomElement" but that's not quite what I want.
This isn't something that Ractive currently supports, though it might in future. You could try doing the following:
frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
// move contents into the document fragment...
while ( oRactive.el.firstChild ) {
frag.appendChild( oRactive.el.firstChild );
}
// ...then into the DOM
someOtherDomElement.appendChild( frag );
// update oRactive.el so oRactive.find() still works
oRactive.el = someOtherDomElement;
Ractive stores references to individual nodes - in most cases it doesn't care about the actual shape of the DOM, and your situation shouldn't pose any obstacles (though I'd be interested to know if you run into any bugs doing this).
I'm writing a GUI extension and using the Anquilla framework to get a list of Keywords within a Category. I'm obtaining an XML document for the list of keywords then working with that document within my extension.
My problem is that the returned XML doesn't contain the Keyword's 'Description' value. I have the Title and Key etc.
My original code looks like this:
var category = $models.getItem("CATEGORYTCMID:);
var list = category.getListKeywords();
list.getXml();
A typical node returned is this:
<tcm:Item ID="tcm:4-1749-1024"
Type="1024" Title="rate_one" Lock="0" IsRoot="true"
Modified="2012-12-17T23:01:59" FromPub="010 Schema"
Key="rate_one_value" IsAbstract="false"
CategoryTitle="TagSelector"
CategoryID="tcm:4-469-512" Icon="T1024L0P0"
Allow="268560384" Deny="96" IsNew="false"
Managed="1024"/></tcm:ListKeywords>
So I've tried using a Filter to give me additional column information:
var filter = new Tridion.ContentManager.ListFilter();
filter.columns = Tridion.Constants.ColumnFilter.EXTENDED;
var list = category.getListKeywords(filter);
Unfortunately this only gives the additional XML attributes:
IsShared="true" IsLocalized="false"
I'd really like the description value to be part of this XML without having to create a Keyword object from the XML. Is such a thing possible?
cough any ideas? cough
I'm afraid you'll have to load the Keyword itself to get the Description.
It's not used in any lists, so it's not returned in the XML.
You could always create a List Extender to add this information to the list, but try to be smart about it since this extender will execute everytime a GetList is called.
Won't save you from having to open every keyword in the list, but you'll be doing it server-side (with Core Service/NetTcp for instance) which will probably be easier and faster than opening each keyword with Anguilla.
In this instance I only need the one keyword, so I simply get it from the CMS. Getting an object in Anguilla is a bit weird, here's the code:
In your main code area:
var selectedKy = $models.getItem("TcmUriOfKeywordHere");
if (selectedKy.isLoaded()) {
p.selectedKy = selectedKy;
this.onselectedKyLoaded();
} else {
$evt.addEventHandler(selectedKy, "load", this.onselectedKyLoaded);
selectedKy.load();
}
It's worth noting how I store the keyword in the properties of the item, so I can obtain it in the onselectedKyLoaded function
The function called once the item is loaded
ContentBloom.ExampleGuiExtension.prototype.onselectedKyLoaded = function (event) {
var p = this.properties;
var selectedDescription = p.selectedKy.getDescription();
// do what you need to do with the description :)
};
I resolved this, thanks to the answer here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/12805939/1221032 - Cheers Nuno :)
I have an AdvancedDataGrid with a HierarchicalCollectionView as its dataProvider. When I view the grid with the dataset I'm working with, and click the header of the column I wish to sort on, everything works perfectly. It sorts it hierarchically exactly how I would expect it to.
What I want to do now is have the grid already be sorted when it is shown to the user. Is there a way to do this programatically? I can't for the life of me figure out how to do this, and clearly it's possible since the AdvancedDataGrid has this built in.
Edit - BTW, I've tried this:
var myData:HierarchicalCollectionView = new HierarchicalCollectionView(theDataSource);
// Works fine using only the line above and clicking the header to sort.
// This is the part that I tried adding:
var sort:Sort = new Sort();
sort.fields = [new SortField("startDate")];
myData.sort = sort;
myData.refresh();
This appears to do something as far as sorting goes, but it doesn't sort it in the same way as clicking the column header. "startDate" is a property of an object in theDataSource by the way.
Looks like you want to sort dates. Sort can't do that out of the box. You have to use a compareFunction.
If your objects are of type Date it's quite easy:
var sortField:SortField = new SortField("startDate");
sortField.compareFunction = ObjectUtil.dateCompare;
In case your column contains dates as strings you'll have to parse them first (code example from http://blog.flexexamples.com/2007/08/12/sorting-date-columns-in-a-datagrid/):
private function date_sortCompareFunc(itemA:Object, itemB:Object):int
{
/* Date.parse() returns an int, but
ObjectUtil.dateCompare() expects two
Date objects, so convert String to
int to Date. */
var dateA:Date = new Date(Date.parse(itemA));
var dateB:Date = new Date(Date.parse(itemB));
return ObjectUtil.dateCompare(dateA, dateB);
}
var sortField:SortField = new SortField("startDate");
sortField.compareFunction = date_sortCompareFunc;
Then just use the sortField like you did in your example. That should work fine.
You can create a new advanced data grid sort event and dispatch it on the grid after the hierarchical data is set on it (unfortunately I've had to use a callLater to give the grid time to deal with the collection internally it seems assignments to the dataProvider of the ADG are sometimes asynchronous)
var advancedDataGridEvent : AdvancedDataGridEvent = new AdvancedDataGridEvent(AdvancedDataGridEvent.SORT, false, true);
advancedDataGridEvent.columnIndex = columnIndex;
advancedDataGridEvent.dataField = dataField;
dispatchEvent(advancedDataGridEvent);
This code is from an extension of ADG so you would want the dispatchEvent to actually be on your instance of the grid if you're not creating an extension.
Also a note from the code:
//setting sortDescending=true on a column does not work as expected. so, until a solution
//is found, this works just as well. the event that is dispatch just tells the column
//to reset. so, one resorts ascending (the default), while a second resorts descending.
//however, this second is only dispatched if defaultSortDesc is true on the grid.
if (defaultSortDesc)
{
dispatchEvent(advancedDataGridEvent);
}
It dispatches the event twice to flip the sort.
I need to remove the value associated with a property in a Flex 3 associative array; is this possible?
For example, suppose I created this array like so:
var myArray:Object = new Object();
myArray[someXML.#attribute] = "foo";
Later, I need to do something like this:
delete myArray[someXML.#attribute];
However, I get this error message at runtime:
Error #1119: Delete operator is not supported with operand of type XMLList.
How do I perform this operation?
delete doesn't do as much in AS3 as it did in AS2:
http://www.gskinner.com/blog/archives/2006/06/understanding_t.html
However, I think your problem might be solved by simply using toString(), i.e.
var myArray:Object = new Object();
myArray[someXML.#attribute.toString()] = "foo";
delete myArray[someXML.#attribute.toString()];
Rather than delete it, try setting the value to null.
myArray[someXML.#attribute] = null;
That way it'll end up the same as any other value in the array that isn't defined.