Topic awaiting preservation: sending style attributes to function (Page 1 of 1)

hi, please can you help,

why doesn't this work:

var TYPE = 'backgroundColor';

getElementByID('myDiv').style.TYPE = '#FFFFFF';

Ok I realise that this code isn't that useful, but what I'm trying to figure out is how to pass a 'style type' dynamically. Do I need to set the variable 'TYPE' as a 'new Object' or something?

Please help if you can.

Jon

Try this instead:

getElementById('myDiv').style.setProperty(TYPE,'#FFFFFF');

He's got a better method but the root of your problem is that accessing elements like that doesn't resolve variables.

This is where an eval statement would be needed.


eval("getElementByID('myDiv').style."+TYPE+" = '#FFFFFF'");




.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

No no no, eval function calls are *not* needed to turn strings into properties! JavaScript has a specific method for handling this:

var TYPE = 'backgroundColor';

getElementByID('myDiv').style[TYPE] = '#FFFFFF';

If you have the property as a string, use the [] operator instead of the dot (.) operator. It's that simple!

Ah, I see, so just like in Actionscript then slime, cool. I stupidly never tried that method although I had thought about it - I automatically assumed it would end up calling some non-existent associative array, so now you see why I'm not cut out to be a coder.

It *does* sort of index an array. Or, more accurately, arrays are the same as objects, and when you do myArray[0], that's *almost* exactly the same as myArray.0 (the only difference is that the latter isn't valid syntax, since properties have to start with letters). So, internally, that's pretty much what's going on.

By the way, Actionscript is based off the same language as JavaScript (it's called ECMAScript), so pretty much anything that's valid in one is valid in the other.

I know about the ECMAScript standard - netscape made JavaScript, then some people came along and standardised the whole thing into ECMAScript then MM made ActionScript from the ECMAScript standard, which is now also followed by JavaScript - or somethign along those lines. ActionScript 2.0 is even more standards compliant apparently.

Out of interest tho, is ECMAScript an actual usuable language in it's own right, or just a standardised format for other scripts to be based on?

[This message has been edited by smonkey (edited 09-05-2003).]

Technically, I think it's a language in it's own right. However, it's useless in the sense that it doesn't contain any methods of *doing* anything. Only when a language (JavaScript, ActionScript) is based on it, and given predefined objects to work with (like the document object) does it have any power. So, in that sense, it's sort of a "base" language.

wow... that kinda sucks.... 'an emasculated language useful only as a skeleton set for new languages'

... kinda makes a language want to commit Hari Kari..

you think one could base a scripting language off of it, like, say, an AI for a game or something?


Code - CGI - links - DHTML - Javascript - Perl - programming - Magic - http://www.twistedport.com
ICQ: 67751342