I am getting an error message as element.dispatchEvent is not a function. I am using jQuery with prototype in rails 3 application. In my layout file, I have added the js files as below
javascript_include_tag 'jquery','jquery_ujs','prototype','shadowbox/shadowbox.js'
<script type="text/javascript">jQuery.noConflict();</script>
I have also added jQuery.noConflict as above and used jQuery instead of $ in jQuery functions. Any idea how to resolve this.?
In my another controller page action I have also mentioned the same thing as there are some js files which needs to be reloaded only for that particular page.
I am a newbie in js as well as rails also.
you should use jQuery.noConflict right after src to the jQuery library
Using jQuery.noConflict(); should be enough. Please check the code of the page in your browser so you can see when prototype is actually added.
You should have jQuery, then the .noConflict call, then prototype.
Besides adding the 'no conflict' method, I do this instead (though both would probably be best):
I'll 'preset' my custom script page. Let's say my prediction is that I will use maybe 5 blocks of code in a page - this is how I preset my page:
jQuery(document).ready(function($) {
// use $ in here like normal!
});
jQuery(document).ready(function($) {
});
jQuery(document).ready(function($) {
});
jQuery(document).ready(function($) {
});
etc. etc.
Notice this uses the jQuery object itself to pass as the callback function to the .ready method so you can once again use the $ identifier within the functions. I can rename it so their will never be a conflict, and I can use the $ identifier within the function like I normally would. Hope that helps.
Related
I'm trying to understand the usage and limitations of server side rendering with vuejs when using aspnet core.
I used this starter kit for aspnet core and vuejs to setup a simple vue site, which is running based on the code here: https://github.com/selaromdotnet/aspnet-vue-ssr-test/tree/master
I then modified the project to update the aspnet-prerendering and added vue-server-renderer, compiling a hodgepodge of sources to cobble together this update: https://github.com/selaromdotnet/aspnet-vue-ssr-test/tree/ssr
If I run this project, the site appears to load fine, and if I turn off the javascript in the browser, I can see that it does appear that the server-side rendering executed and populated the html result:
however, because JavaScript is disabled, the content isn't moved into the dom as it looks like it is trying to...
My understanding of server-side rendering is that it would populate the html entirely and serve a completed page to the user, so that even if JS was disabled, they'd at least be able to see the page (specifically for SEO purposes). Am I incorrect?
Now I believe modern search engines will execute simple scripts like this to get the content, but I still don't want a blank page rendered if js is disabled...
Is this a limitation of server-side rendering, or perhaps specifically ssr with vue and/or aspnet core?
or am I just missing a step somewhere?
Edit: more information
I looked at the source code for what I believe is the method that prerenders the section here: https://github.com/aspnet/JavaScriptServices/blob/dev/src/Microsoft.AspNetCore.SpaServices/Prerendering/PrerenderTagHelper.cs
The line
output.Content.SetHtmlContent(result.Html);
has a null value for result.Html. However, when I manually edit this value to put a test value, it also doesn't render to the output html, and the app div tag is still empty...
If I'm doing something wrong to populate the result.Html value with the expected output, that's one thing, and I would appreciate some help in doing that, especially since the output html appears to be found, since it's in the script that immediately follows...
However, even if I were to populate it, it appears it's being skipped, as evidenced by me manually changing the value. is this a bug in the code or am I doing somethigng wrong, or perhaps both?
As you correctly noticed, for your project, result.Html inside the tag helper is null. So that line cannot be the location where the output is being generated. Since the HTML output from your prerendering script also does not include a script tag, it is clear that something has to generate that. The only other line that could possible do this is the following from the PrerenderTagHelper:
output.PostElement.SetHtmlContent($"<script>{globalsScript}</script>");
That would fit the observed output, so we should figure out where the globalsScript comes from.
If you look at the PrerenderTagHelper implementation, you can see that it will call Prerenderer.RenderToString which returns a RenderToStringResult. This result object is deserialized from JSON after calling your Node script.
So there are two properties of interest here: Html, and Globals. The former is responsible for containing the HTML output that finally gets rendered inside the tag helper. The latter is a JSON object containing additional global variables that should be set for the client side. These are what will be rendered inside that script tag.
If you look at the rendered HTML from your project, you can see that there are two globals: window.html and window.__INITIAL_STATE__. So these two are set somewhere in your code, although html shouldn’t be a global.
The culprit is the renderOnServer.js file:
vue_renderer.renderToString(context, (err, _html) => {
if (err) { reject(err.message) }
resolve({
globals: {
html: _html,
__INITIAL_STATE__: context.state
}
})
})
As you can see, this will resolve the result containing just a globals object with both html and __INITIAL_STATE__ properties. That’s what gets rendered inside of the script tag.
But what you want to do instead is have html not as part of globals but on the layer above, so that it gets deserialized into the RenderToStringResult.Html property:
resolve({
html: _html,
globals: {
__INITIAL_STATE__: context.state
}
})
If you do it like that, your project will properly perform server-side rendering, without requiring JavaScript for the initial view.
I'd like to be able to use Jquery in my Enduro.js project, but there is not a single sample using it on github Enduro.js page
Libraries seem to be loaded in Enduro.js using RequireJS, wth the line found at the bottom of the default index.hbs :
{{!-- <script data-main="/assets/js/main.js" src="/assets/vendor/requirejs/require.js"></script> --}}
and the following code found un "assets/js/main.js" by default in all Enduro.js samples :
require.config({
baseUrl: '/assets/',
paths: {
// 'jquery': 'vendor/jquery/dist/jquery.min',
},
})
require(['jquery'], function ($) {
$(document).ready(function () {
console.log('requirejs ready to use')
})
})
The Jquery "path" line is commented out, and there is no /vendor directory in /assets by default.
Is there an automated way to install jquery in Enduro.js or is it just simply about creating by hand a /vendor folder, and copying /Jquery inside it ?
Well, there are many ways to use JQuery in Enduro. I'm not sure if it is the best way to import it (it could exist better ones).
In my current project, I'm using the CDN for reasons of efficiency. If you have no problem using CDNs I'd recommend it.
just copy this code:
<script
src="https://code.jquery.com/jquery-3.3.1.min.js"
integrity="sha256-FgpCb/KJQlLNfOu91ta32o/NMZxltwRo8QtmkMRdAu8="
crossorigin="anonymous">
</script>
And then, paste it just before closing the body tag.
Another way is to create a folder inside /assets/js called 'vendor' and there, you cat put the jquery-3.3.x.min.js (Or whatever version you would like to use). Of course, you have to download it first from the official site.
After doing that, you just have to import it via HTML (before closing body tag):
<script src="assets/js/vendor/jqueryfile.js"></script>
NOTE: Creating the folder called 'vendor' is optional, you just could paste the file inside /assets/js. And make sure you type the right path to import it.
NOTE 2: remember that you should never touch the files inside _generated, so if you paste the file inside _genereated/assets/js, everything is going to work, but when you migrate your site to production or anywhere else the app will crash.
Hope this helps.
It seems to be impossible to disable auto initialization:
Both
$.lazyLoadXT.autoInit=false;
AND
$.extend($.lazyLoadXT, {
autoInit: false
});
do not prevent lazy loading.
jsfiddle:
https://jsfiddle.net/cvlug/16f5h1mn/
You may want to try the code specified in the docs:
$.lazyLoadXT.autoInit=false;
That didn't work for our project, which loads jQuery and lazyLoadXT sandboxed within a Require.js object. LazyLoadXT appears to be trying to access jQuery as window.$ which, but that is not where jQuery is located when it's loaded inside Require.js.
We ended up making a fork of lazyLoad that addresses this issue, by removing their jQuery wrapper and wrapping their code inside a Require.js define statement. Now it's all the same scope. Maybe it will be useful:
https://github.com/Sitetheory/lazy-load-xt
I have seen numerous advice on stackexchange and all over the web suggesting that I not use jquery's live function. And at this point, it is deprecated, so I'd like to get rid of it. Also I am trying to keep my javascript in one place(unobtrusive)--so I'm not putting it at the bottom of the page. I am unclear though on how to rewrite the code to avoid live for elements that don't yet exist on the page.
Within the javascript file for my site I have something like this:
$(function() {
$('button.test').live('click', function(){
alert('test');
});
});
.on( doesn't work since the element doesn't exist yet.
The button is in a page I load in a colorbox pop-up modal window. I'm not sure exactly where that colorbox window sits in the DOM but I think it is near the top.
I could use delegate and attach this to the document--but isn't the whole point of not using live to avoid this?
What is the best way to get rid of live in this case?
You can use .on() - http://api.jquery.com/on/
$(document).on("click", "button.test", function() {
alert('test');
});
If you use live() you can use die().
You can also use on() and off().
They do about the same thing but its recomended to use on.
I ended up avoiding both live and an on attached at the document level. Here's how:
Wrap all of the jquery code specific to objects in a page which loads in the colorbox window in the function like so:
function cboxready(){
...
}
The code wrapped in this function can attach directly to the objects (instead of attaching at the document level) since it will only get run once the colorbox window is open.
Then just call this function using colorbox's callback when you attach the colorbox, like so:
$('a.cbox').colorbox({
onComplete:function(){ cboxready(); }
});
I'm using the following html to load dojo from Google's hosting.
<script src="http://www.google.com/jsapi"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">google.load("dojo", "1.1.1");</script>
<script type="text/javascript">
dojo.require("dojox.gfx");
...
This errors out on the requre line with an error like dojox.gfx is undefined. Is there a way to make this work, or does Google not support the dojox extensions?
Alternatively, is there another common host I can use for standard dojo releases?
Differently from when you reference the .js files directly from the <script> tag (note that google js api also supports this, see here), google.load is not synchronous. This means that when your code reach google.load, it will not wait for dojo to be fully loaded to keep parsing; it will go straight to your dojo.require line, and it will fail there because the dojo object will be undefined.
The solution (if you don't want to use use the direct <script> tag), is to enclose all your code that references dojo in a start function, and set it will as a callback, by doing:
google.load("dojo", "1.1.1", {callback: start});
function start() {
dojo.require("dojox.gfx");
...
}
or
google.setOnLoadCallback(start);
google.load("dojo", "1.1.1");
function start() {
dojo.require("dojox.gfx");
...
}
A better question is - why would you want to? If you are developing on your localhost then just use a relative path, if you're developing on an internet facing server - stick the dojo files on that.
Also - make sure you're not falling foul of the same origin policy
I believe that google becomes the namespace for your imported libraries. Try: google.dojo.require.
Oh! And as pointed out below, don't forget to use google.setOnLoadCallback instead of calling your function directly.
dojox is practically unmaintained, and will be taken out from dojo-2. There are major problems with most widgets in dojox, there is only a few good.
IMHO dojo should be self-hosted, because there are always things what you need to overwrite - for example, you need some fix in this dojox.gfx.