Vanadium posted:

But the interpreter is going to add more ; anyway, it is not like you are going to convince it that you know your poo poo and it does not need to put a ; after return

NotShadowStar posted:

Lua and Ruby the semi-colon is defined as optional. ECMAScript the semicolon is not-optional, but the interpreter tries to fix this for you, and is usually wrong.

NotShadowStar posted:

Lua and Ruby the semi-colon is defined as optional. ECMAScript the semicolon is not-optional, but the interpreter tries to fix this for you, and is usually wrong.

ECMA-262 posted:

7.9 Automatic Semicolon Insertion

quote:

Certain ECMAScript statements (empty statement, variable statement, expression statement, do-while statement, continue statement, break statement, return statement, and throw statement) must be terminated with semicolons. Such semicolons may always appear explicitly in the source text. For convenience, however, such semicolons may be omitted from the source text in certain situations.

There Will Be Penalty posted:

Vanadium posted:

Ruby forces you to do ary.each do { derp } and does not allow ary.each do
{
  derp
} either

dark_panda posted:

You can't do both the "do" statement and curly braces together for blocks in Ruby, it has to be one or the other. What you have there is a syntax error.

dark_panda posted:

You can't do both the "do" statement and curly braces together for blocks in Ruby, it has to be one or the other. What you have there is a syntax error.

Vanadium posted:

Fine, remove the do

Vanadium posted:

Ruby forces you to do ary.each do { derp } and does not allow ary.each do
{
  derp
} either

Vanadium posted:

Both ruby and js put ; at the end of every line unless there is like a , there or an open ( somewhere or whatever!

Why is it a big deal for one of them and not the other?

There Will Be Penalty posted:

I believe it's safe to say that automatic semicolon insertion is invoked when it *can* be, i.e., when it won't cause a syntax error to do so at EOL.

There Will Be Penalty posted:

] = 5;[/code]It *will* be invoked if your innermost matching brackets are the curly brackets surrounding the body of a function, of course:

code:

foo.buttz(function () {
        x = 5           // it's invoked here
        + 6;
});

Vanadium posted:

well gently caress if the parser tree says so

Vanadium posted:

well gently caress if the parser tree says so

Evil Robot posted:

So here's a dumb question:

I am trying to use Google's Blobstore (http://code.google.com/appengine/docs/python/blobstore/overview.html). In order to upload data, they require you post to a serving URL that you embed in the client's JavaScript (yay, got that) and that the data come from a form with an input type="file" element. Now, what I really want to send is some data I have in a JavaScript string variable. Is it possible for me to POST (with enctype="multipart/form-data") that data somehow?

Basic Googling seems to indicate this is not really possible with any of JQuery's AJAXy functions, but that Dojo might have some promise (http://dojotoolkit.org/reference-guide/dojo/io/iframe.html#dojo-io-iframe). However, I can't really see how to put the string data I have into a generated input="file" form. Is this just not possible? If so, why is this stuff not possible?

Parantumaton posted:

File upload can't be done through Ajax alone, you need to use an iframe or Flash to make it look like it's something Ajaxy.

Lumpy posted:

code:

// I assume 'snapshotLength' is a built in property or something as it's never defined....
                if (myCount < evil.snapshotLength) {  
                ...
	event.preventDefault();
	evil = document.evaluate("TBODY/TR/TD/DIV/A[contains(@class,'count')]",
	            document.getElementById("forum"), null, 7, null);

Nigglypuff posted:

Pretty sure the XPath selector backend was removed from jQuery, since the browsers who supported it all support document.querySelectorAll now anyway.

And since we're on the subject of jQuery:

code:

// ==UserScript==
// @name           SA: Open New Posts in New Tabs
// @include        htt*://forums.somethingawful.com/*
// ==/UserScript==

var $ = unsafeWindow.jQuery;

var button = $("<a href=# style='float:right;margin-right:8px'>Open New Posts in New Tabs</a>");

button.prependTo("th.title").click(function (event) {
	event.preventDefault();
	var nodes = $(".count").toArray();
	new function() {
		if (! nodes.length) return;
		GM_openInTab(nodes.shift().href);
		setTimeout(arguments.callee, 110);
	};
});

Nigglypuff posted:

Pretty sure the XPath selector backend was removed from jQuery, since the browsers who supported it all support document.querySelectorAll now anyway.

And since we're on the subject of jQuery:

code:

// ==UserScript==
// @name           SA: Open New Posts in New Tabs
// @include        htt*://forums.somethingawful.com/*
// ==/UserScript==

var $ = unsafeWindow.jQuery;

var button = $("<a href=# style='float:right;margin-right:8px'>Open New Posts in New Tabs</a>");

button.prependTo("th.title").click(function (event) {
	event.preventDefault();
	var nodes = $(".count").toArray();
	new function() {
		if (! nodes.length) return;
		GM_openInTab(nodes.shift().href);
		setTimeout(arguments.callee, 110);
	};
});

Lumpy posted:

Look at all those useless semicolons.

Lumpy posted:

Serious question: why the use of new function() and arguments.callee instead of a local var that's assigned the function and then a reference to that in the timeout? I know what you are doing is effectively equivalent, but interested if there is an advantage to doing it your way.

peepsalot posted:

What the hell does "new function (){...};" even do? Don't you have to actually call the function like so: "new (function() {...})();" ?

epswing posted:

You're just pretending not to know something in an attempt to fit in with the rest of us.

OddObserver posted:

It calls the anonymous function/function expression as a constructor --- so 'this' is set to a fresh object inside the function (since the function object doesn't have .prototype), and the entire expression evaluates to that object.

So basically the same as:
var tmp = function () {
....
}

new tmp;

... just without storing it.

Edit: change example to be closer.

Insurrectum posted:

I'm writing a script that finds a phrase in a page and then determines if the previous link matches one in an array of objects, and if it doesn't adds that link to the end of that array. For some reason it isn't working, however. It finds the phrase but doesn't collect the link. Can anyone see what's going wrong?

code:

function searchpage() {
	var grabbedElems = new Array();
	var grabbedLinks = new Array();
	var bElems = document.getElementsByTagName('a');
	for (var i = 0; i < bElems.length; i++) {
		if (bElems[i].innerHTML == “phrase”) {
			if (grabbedElems.indexOf(bElems[i-1].innerHTML) == -1) {
				grabbedElems.push(bElems[i-1].innerHTML);
				grabbedLinks.push(bElems[i-1]);
			}
		}
	}
}

Lumpy posted:

Don't use new Array() It makes baby jeebus cry. You will also trying to access the -1 element of bElms the first time through your loop, so that might be the cause of some woes.

EDIT: use varName = [] instead.