Supervillin posted:

Haven't looked at jQuery's source in a while so I'm not sure how they implement getting that path (since obviously it's JS, not CSS), but that might be why IE6 barfs.

SuckerPunched posted:

I have a pretty strong hunch that Firefox is the broken one in this case, allowing you to hide <option> tags.

The correct/better way is to remove/add the items that are unavailable, and add them back in when a valid selection is made.

I've used and like this plugin for easier selectbox manipulation: http://www.texotela.co.uk/code/jquery/select/

Supervillin posted:

Adding/removing items is the "right" way, like SuckerPunched said, but also IE6 doesn't recognize the child selector ">" in CSS. Haven't looked at jQuery's source in a while so I'm not sure how they implement getting that path (since obviously it's JS, not CSS), but that might be why IE6 barfs.

Sylink posted:

This is a general javascript questions.

Supervillin posted:

Adding/removing items is the "right" way, like SuckerPunched said, but also IE6 doesn't recognize the child selector ">" in CSS. Haven't looked at jQuery's source in a while so I'm not sure how they implement getting that path (since obviously it's JS, not CSS), but that might be why IE6 barfs.

Sylink posted:

I'm using the Jquery UI for some resizable elements. Is there way to retrieve the height/width values of the new box size?

Sylink posted:

But the position part isn't occurring , even if I add position:absolute it does not work.

Sylink posted:

No would that affect it?

ATLbeer posted:

The reason why I don't think I can use the normal $.getJSON("url", function(data){do stuff here}); pattern is that I can't seem to get data back OUT of the function(data) space. Is the proper pattern to create an object and pass it as a parameter to be manipulated in the function?

Zorilla posted:

Looking at the documentation, you'd probably have to do it this way:

code:

var list_users;

$.getJSON("/ajax/data/listusers/", function(data) {
	list_users = data;
});

ATLbeer posted:

FireBug logs out at console "undefined" for user_list

That URI returns this data

code:

[{"username": "test"}]

Zorilla posted:

What happens when you do console.log(user_list) from inside the function? Or with the data variable?

Here is another idea:

code:

list_users = $.ajax({
	url: "/ajax/data/listusers/",
	dataType: "json"
}).responseText;

Nigglypuff posted:

$.getJSON is asynchronous, so it returns immediately, but the function that you pass as the second parameter will not be called until the HTTP response actually arrives. Try this:

code:

        var user_list = "dummydata";
        $.getJSON("/ajax/data/listusers/", function(data){
            user_list = data;
           console.log('inside block...' + user_list)
        });
        console.log('outside block...' + user_list);

ATLbeer posted:

Yeah, figured out that getJSON is an async call

I dropped the getJSON code in the (document).ready block, declared the user_list in the global namespace and left the rest of the logic in the action call for the button press

Since user_list is populated on page load and the action us called on user press. I can't 100.00% guarantee the user_list variable will be populated by the time the button is pressed but, it almost always will be for all real-world cases

It might fail an automated unit test though.

Zorilla posted:

Yeah, that's why I think you should do this synchronously:

code:

list_users = $.ajax({
	url: "/ajax/data/listusers/",
	dataType: "json",
	async: false // Forgot this before. 
}).responseText;

Also, if the goal is just to duplicate a select box, is there anything keeping you from doing this?

code:

$('.somebutton').click(function() {
	$('select.users').after(this.html());
});

MrData posted:

Zorilla posted:

You're handling parsedJSON.sequences like it's a jQuery selection instead of a plain old JSON object. How are you assigning that variable its value? Is it just a JSON object like [{"id": "stuff", "name": "junk"}] or is it something created by doing something like parsedJSON.sequences = $('div.selectme'); ?

There also may be a bunch of things in that code that may indicate a misunderstanding of how jQuery works, but I'm not ready to conclude that yet.

Zorilla posted:

Ok, I've been repeatedly updating my previous post to provide an example that I think might work. I can't test it though, so it may still need adjustments.

Probably the biggest thing to keep note of in my example is the difference between jQuery.each and Core/each. I switched to using the former because it's a generic iterator meant to handle objects and arrays. You were using Core/each before, and that's designed to use jQuery selections like $('div.selectme');.

MrData posted:

Welp, after some more Googling around this seems to work fine:

code:

jQuery.each(parsedJSON.sequences, function() {
				
  var temp = this;			
  var div = '<div name="'+this.name+'"><input type="hidden" name="sequence_id[]"value="'+this.id+'"/>
<a href="#">CLICK ME</a></div>';			
  $('#sequences').append(div);
			
  $('div[name='+this.name+'] a').click(function() {		
    alert(temp.id);
  });
  });

Although I don't understand why you'd have to keep a copy of 'this' and use that in the anon. method. Isn't this doing pretty much what it did before, but now using a (reference?) copy of 'this' instead of using 'this' directly? I still have much to learn

edit: your updated code also works!

sonic bed head posted:

If you're ever planning on learning real javascript (more than UI fancyness, maybe some actual application), sans jQuery foolishness...never learn what you just said. jQuery very stupidly overwrites the this variable that's used very frequently in javascript for other things. That's my biggest problem with jQuery and why I'm still a Prototype user for anything other than adding nice event handlers.

sonic bed head posted:

If you're ever planning on learning real javascript (more than UI fancyness, maybe some actual application), sans jQuery foolishness...never learn what you just said. jQuery very stupidly overwrites the this variable that's used very frequently in javascript for other things. That's my biggest problem with jQuery and why I'm still a Prototype user for anything other than adding nice event handlers.

Nigglypuff posted:

In javascript, this is not a variable — it's a nullary operator that returns the receiver of the current function context. You can't directly assign it a value, and it is never captured by a closure. When invoked, every function receives a new value of this, regardless of where the function was defined, or what value of this existed in the enclosing scope of the definition.

I'm confused about what you thing jQuery is doing wrong here. The nature of Javascript means that an API which takes callbacks/closures as method parameters has no way knowing what value of this existed in the scope where the callbacks were created, so it has to set a new value of this, or allow it to default to the global object, which is rarely what people want.

As far as I know, the convention in both jQuery and Prototype is to automatically bind this in event handlers to the object which received the event. For list iteration with callbacks, jQuery automatically sets this to be the current list element, whereas Prototype passes the element to the closure as an argument. In either case it is simply a matter of API convention, and not objectively stupid.

It is a weakness of Javascript that the this pseudovariable rarely behaves the way people expect it to behave, and it can uglify otherwise pretty closure-passing code. But do you really feel that jQuery in particular handles this badly?

Sylink posted: