Triki w JS (http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/A_re-introduction_to_JavaScript)

1. Tworzenie obiektów:

   1. var obj = new Object();

   2. var obj = {};

2. Dostęp do nich:
   obj.name = "Simon" var name = obj.name; lub
   obj["name"] = "Simon"; var name = obj["name"];

3. obj.for = "Simon"; // Syntax error, because 'for' is a reserved word obj["for"] = "Simon"; // works fine

4. var obj = {     name: "Carrot",     "for": "Max",     details: {         color: "orange",         size: 12     } }

5. > obj.details.color orange > obj["details"]["size"] 12

6. Pętla: 
   for (var i = 0, len = a.length; i < len; i++) {     // Do something with a[i] }

7. for (var i = 0, item; item = a[i]; i++) {     // Do something with item }

8. for (var i in a) {   // Do something with a[i] }

9. a[a.length] = item;                 // same as a.push(item);

10. a.toString(), a.toLocaleString(), a.concat(item, ..), a.join(sep), a.pop(), a.push(item, ..), a.reverse(), a.shift(), a.slice(start, end), a.sort(cmpfn), a.splice(start, delcount, [item]..), a.unshift([item]..)

11. Inne funkcje: 
    function add() {     var sum = 0;     for (var i = 0, j = arguments.length; i < j; i++) {         sum += arguments[i];     }     return sum; }  > add(2, 3, 4, 5) 14

12. Functions 
    Along with objects, functions are the core component in understanding JavaScript. The most basic function couldn't be much simpler: 
    function add(x, y) {     var total = x + y;     return total; } 
    This demonstrates everything there is to know about basic functions. A JavaScript function can take 0 or more named parameters. The function body can contain as many statements as you like, and can declare its own variables which are local to that function. The return statement can be used to return a value at any time, terminating the function. If no return statement is used (or an empty return with no value), JavaScript returns undefined. 
    The named parameters turn out to be more like guidelines than anything else. You can call a function without passing the parameters it expects, in which case they will be set to undefined. 
    > add() NaN // You can't perform addition on undefined 
    You can also pass in more arguments than the function is expecting: 
    > add(2, 3, 4) 5 // added the first two; 4 was ignored 
    That may seem a little silly, but functions have access to an additional variable inside their body called arguments, which is an array-like object holding all of the values passed to the function. Let's re-write the add function to take as many values as we want: 
    function add() {     var sum = 0;     for (var i = 0, j = arguments.length; i < j; i++) {         sum += arguments[i];     }     return sum; }  > add(2, 3, 4, 5) 14 
    That's really not any more useful than writing 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 though. Let's create an averaging function: 
    function avg() {     var sum = 0;     for (var i = 0, j = arguments.length; i < j; i++) {         sum += arguments[i];     }     return sum / arguments.length; } > avg(2, 3, 4, 5) 3.5 
    This is pretty useful, but introduces a new problem. The avg() function takes a comma separated list of arguments - but what if you want to find the average of an array? You could just rewrite the function as follows: 
    function avgArray(arr) {     var sum = 0;     for (var i = 0, j = arr.length; i < j; i++) {         sum += arr[i];     }     return sum / arr.length; } > avgArray([2, 3, 4, 5]) 3.5 
    But it would be nice to be able to reuse the function that we've already created. Luckily, JavaScript lets you call a function and call it with an arbitrary array of arguments, using the apply() method of any function object. 
    > avg.apply(null, [2, 3, 4, 5]) 3.5 
    The second argument to apply() is the array to use as arguments; the first will be discussed later on. This emphasizes the fact that functions are objects too. 
    JavaScript lets you create anonymous functions. 
    var avg = function() {     var sum = 0;     for (var i = 0, j = arguments.length; i < j; i++) {         sum += arguments[i];     }     return sum / arguments.length; } 
    This is semantically equivalent to the function avg() form. It's extremely powerful, as it lets you put a full function definition anywhere that you would normally put an expression. This enables all sorts of clever tricks. Here's a way of "hiding" some local variables - like block scope in C: 
    > var a = 1; > var b = 2; > (function() {     var b = 3;     a += b; })(); > a 4 > b 2 
    JavaScript allows you to call functions recursively. This is particularly useful for dealing with tree structures, such as you get in the browser DOM. 
    function countChars(elm) {     if (elm.nodeType == 3) { // TEXT_NODE         return elm.nodeValue.length;     }     var count = 0;     for (var i = 0, child; child = elm.childNodes[i]; i++) {         count += countChars(child);     }     return count; } 
    This highlights a potential problem with anonymous functions: how do you call them recursively if they don't have a name? The answer lies with the arguments object, which in addition to acting as a list of arguments also provides a property called arguments.callee. This always refers to the current function, and hence can be used to make recursive calls: 
    var charsInBody = (function(elm) {     if (elm.nodeType == 3) { // TEXT_NODE         return elm.nodeValue.length;     }     var count = 0;     for (var i = 0, child; child = elm.childNodes[i]; i++) {         count += arguments.callee(child);     }     return count; })(document.body); 
    Since arguments.callee is the current function, and all functions are objects, you can use arguments.callee to save information across multiple calls to the same function. Here's a function that remembers how many times it has been called: 
    function counter() {     if (!arguments.callee.count) {         arguments.callee.count = 0;     }     return arguments.callee.count++; }  > counter() 0 > counter() 1 > counter() 2 
    Custom objects 
    In classic Object Oriented Programming, objects are collections of data and methods that operate on that data. Let's consider a person object with first and last name fields. There are two ways in which their name might be displayed: as "first last" or as "last, first". Using the functions and objects that we've discussed previously, here's one way of doing it: 
    function makePerson(first, last) {     return {         first: first,         last: last     } } function personFullName(person) {     return person.first + ' ' + person.last; } function personFullNameReversed(person) {     return person.last + ', ' + person.first } > s = makePerson("Simon", "Willison"); > personFullName(s) Simon Willison > personFullNameReversed(s) Willison, Simon 
    This works, but it's pretty ugly. You end up with dozens of functions in your global namespace. What we really need is a way to attach a function to an object. Since functions are objects, this is easy: 
    function makePerson(first, last) {     return {         first: first,         last: last,         fullName: function() {             return this.first + ' ' + this.last;         },         fullNameReversed: function() {             return this.last + ', ' + this.first;         }     } } > s = makePerson("Simon", "Willison") > s.fullName() Simon Willison > s.fullNameReversed() Willison, Simon 
    There's something here we haven't seen before: the 'this' keyword. Used inside a function, 'this' refers to the current object. What that actually means is specified by the way in which you called that function. If you called it using dot notation or bracket notation on an object, that object becomes 'this'. If dot notation wasn't used for the call, 'this' refers to the global object. This is a frequent cause of mistakes. For example: 
    > s = makePerson("Simon", "Willison") > var fullName = s.fullName; > fullName() undefined undefined 
    When we call fullName(), 'this' is bound to the global object. Since there are no global variables called first or last we get undefined for each one. 
    We can take advantage of the 'this' keyword to improve our makePerson function: 
    function Person(first, last) {     this.first = first;     this.last = last;     this.fullName = function() {         return this.first + ' ' + this.last;     }     this.fullNameReversed = function() {         return this.last + ', ' + this.first;     } } var s = new Person("Simon", "Willison"); 
    We've introduced another keyword: 'new'. new is strongly related to 'this'. What it does is it creates a brand new empty object, and then calls the function specified, with 'this' set to that new object. Functions that are designed to be called by 'new' are called constructor functions. Common practise is to capitalise these functions as a reminder to call them with new. 
    Our person objects are getting better, but there are still some ugly edges to them. Every time we create a person object we are creating two brand new function objects within it - wouldn't it be better if this code was shared? 
    function personFullName() {     return this.first + ' ' + this.last; } function personFullNameReversed() {     return this.last + ', ' + this.first; } function Person(first, last) {     this.first = first;     this.last = last;     this.fullName = personFullName;     this.fullNameReversed = personFullNameReversed; } 
    That's better: we are creating the method functions only once, and assigning references to them inside the constructor. Can we do any better than that? The answer is yes: 
    function Person(first, last) {     this.first = first;     this.last = last; } Person.prototype.fullName = function() {     return this.first + ' ' + this.last; } Person.prototype.fullNameReversed = function() {     return this.last + ', ' + this.first; } 
    Person.prototype is an object shared by all instances of Person. It forms part of a lookup chain (that has a special name, "prototype chain"): any time you attempt to access a property of Person that isn't set, JavaScript will check Person.prototype to see if that property exists there instead. As a result, anything assigned to Person.prototype becomes available to all instances of that constructor via the this object. 
    This is an incredibly powerful tool. JavaScript lets you modify something's prototype at any time in your program, which means you can add extra methods to existing objects at runtime: 
    > s = new Person("Simon", "Willison"); > s.firstNameCaps(); TypeError on line 1: s.firstNameCaps is not a function > Person.prototype.firstNameCaps = function() {     return this.first.toUpperCase() } > s.firstNameCaps() SIMON 
    Interestingly, you can also add things to the prototype of built-in JavaScript objects. Let's add a method to String that returns that string in reverse: 
    > var s = "Simon"; > s.reversed() TypeError on line 1: s.reversed is not a function > String.prototype.reversed = function() {     var r = "";     for (var i = this.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) {         r += this[i];     }     return r; } > s.reversed() nomiS 
    Our new method even works on string literals! 
    > "This can now be reversed".reversed() desrever eb won nac sihT 
    As I mentioned before, the prototype forms part of a chain. The root of that chain is Object.prototype, whose methods include toString() - it is this method that is called when you try to represent an object as a string. This is useful for debugging our Person objects: 
    > var s = new Person("Simon", "Willison"); > s [object Object] > Person.prototype.toString = function() {     return '<Person: ' + this.fullName() + '>'; } > s <Person: Simon Willison> 
    Remember how avg.apply() had a null first argument? We can revisit that now. The first argument to apply() is the object that should be treated as 'this'. For example, here's a trivial implementation of 'new': 
    function trivialNew(constructor) {     var o = {}; // Create an object     constructor.apply(o, arguments);     return o; } 
    This isn't an exact replica of new as it doesn't set up the prototype chain. apply() is difficult to illustrate - it's not something you use very often, but it's useful to know about. 
    apply() has a sister function named call, which again lets you set 'this' but takes an expanded argument list as opposed to an array. 
    function lastNameCaps() {     return this.last.toUpperCase(); } var s = new Person("Simon", "Willison"); lastNameCaps.call(s); // Is the same as: s.lastNameCaps = lastNameCaps; s.lastNameCaps(); 
    Inner functions 
    JavaScript function declarations are allowed inside other functions. We've seen this once before, with an earlier makePerson() function. An important detail of nested functions in JavaScript is that they can access variables in their parent function's scope: 
    function betterExampleNeeded() {     var a = 1;     function oneMoreThanA() {         return a + 1;     }     return oneMoreThanA(); } 
    This provides a great deal of utility in writing more maintainable code. If a function relies on one or two other functions that are not useful to any other part of your code, you can nest those utility functions inside the function that will be called from elsewhere. This keeps the number of functions that are in the global scope down, which is always a good thing. 
    This is also a great counter to the lure of global variables. When writing complex code it is often tempting to use global variables to share values between multiple functions - which leads to code that is hard to maintain. Nested functions can share variables in their parent, so you can use that mechanism to couple functions together when it makes sense without polluting your global namespace - 'local globals' if you like. This technique should be used with caution, but it's a useful ability to have. 
    [Closures 
    This leads us to one of the most powerful abstractions that JavaScript has to offer - but also the most potentially confusing. What does this do? 
    function makeAdder(a) {     return function(b) {         return a + b;     } } x = makeAdder(5); y = makeAdder(20); x(6) ? y(7) ? 
    The name of the makeAdder function should give it away: it creates new 'adder' functions, which when called with one argument add it to the argument that they were created with. 
    What's happening here is pretty much the same as was happening with the inner functions earlier on: a function defined inside another function has access to the outer function's variables. The only difference here is that the outer function has returned, and hence common sense would seem to dictate that its local variables no longer exist. But they do still exist - otherwise the adder functions would be unable to work. What's more, there are two different "copies" of makeAdder's local variables - one in which a is 5 and one in which a is 20. So the result of those function calls is as follows: 
    x(6) // returns 11 y(7) // returns 27 
    Here's what's actually happening. Whenever JavaScript executes a function, a 'scope' object is created to hold the local variables created within that function. It is initialised with any variables passed in as function parameters. This is similar to the global object that all global variables and functions live in, but with a couple of important differences: firstly, a brand new scope object is created every time a function starts executing, and secondly, unlike the global object (which in browsers is accessible as window) these scope objects cannot be directly accessed from your JavaScript code. There is no mechanism for iterating over the properties of the current scope object for example. 
    So when makeAdder is called, a scope object is created with one property: a, which is the argument passed to the makeAdder function. makeAdder then returns a newly created function. Normally JavaScript's garbage collector would clean up the scope object created for makeAdder at this point, but the returned function maintains a reference back to that scope object. As a result, the scope object will not be garbage collected until there are no more references to the function object that makeAdder returned. 
    Scope objects form a chain called the scope chain, similar to the prototype chain used by JavaScript's object system. 
    A closure is the combination of a function and the scope object in which it was created. 
    Closures let you save state - as such, they can often be used in place of objects. 
    Memory leaks 
    An unfortunate side effect of closures is that they make it trivially easy to leak memory in Internet Explorer. JavaScript is a garbage collected language - objects are allocated memory upon their creation and that memory is reclaimed by the browser when no references to an object remain. Objects provided by the host environment are handled by that environment. 
    Browser hosts need to manage a large number of objects representing the HTML page being presented - the objects of the DOM. It is up to the browser to manage the allocation and recovery of these. 
    Internet Explorer uses its own garbage collection scheme for this, separate from the mechanism used by JavaScript. It is the interaction between the two that can cause memory leaks. 
    A memory leak in IE occurs any time a circular reference is formed between a JavaScript object and a native object. Consider the following: 
    function leakMemory() {     var el = document.getElementById('el');     var o = { 'el': el };     el.o = o; } 
    The circular reference formed above creates a memory leak; IE will not free the memory used by el and o until the browser is completely restarted. 
    The above case is likely to go unnoticed; memory leaks only become a real concern in long running applications or applications that leak large amounts of memory due to large data structures or leak patterns within loops. 
    Leaks are rarely this obvious - often the leaked data structure can have many layers of references, obscuring the circular reference. 
    Closures make it easy to create a memory leak without meaning to. Consider this: 
    function addHandler() {     var el = document.getElementById('el');     el.onclick = function() {         this.style.backgroundColor = 'red';     } } 
    The above code sets up the element to turn red when it is clicked. It also creates a memory leak. Why? Because the reference to el is inadvertently caught in the closure created for the anonymous inner function. This creates a circular reference between a JavaScript object (the function) and a native object (el). 
    There are a number of workarounds for this problem. The simplest is this: 
    function addHandler() {     var el = document.getElementById('el');     el.onclick = function() {         this.style.backgroundColor = 'red';     }     el = null; } 
    This works by breaking the circular reference. 
    Surprisingly, one trick for breaking circular references introduced by a closure is to add another closure: 
    function addHandler() {     var clickHandler = function() {         this.style.backgroundColor = 'red';     }     (function() {         var el = document.getElementById('el');         el.onclick = clickHandler;     })(); } 
    The inner function is executed straight away, and hides its contents from the closure created with clickHandler. 
    Another good trick for avoiding closures is breaking circular references during the window.onunload event. Many event libraries will do this for you. Note that doing so disables bfcache in Firefox 1.5, so you should not register an unload listener in Firefox, unless you have other reasons to do so.