- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 236
You must be registered to see links
how can I only retrieve an element from var arrays one at a time in an arranged number?
no math.random pls
Most visitors online was 12720 , on 2 May 2024
-
Unfortunately, we have experienced significant hard drive damage that requires urgent maintenance and rebuilding. The forum will be a state of read only until we install our new drives and rebuild all the configurations needed. Please follow our Facebook page for updates, we will be back up shortly! (The forum could go offline at any given time due to the nature of the failed drives whilst awaiting the upgrades.) When you see an Incapsula error, you know we are in the process of migration.
this is dumb i know
- Thread starter NubPro
- Start date
how can I only retrieve an element from var arrays one at a time in an arranged number?
no math.random pls
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2006
- Messages
- 3,634
- Reaction score
- 1,007
What exactly do you mean by an arranged number?
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,305
- Reaction score
- 167
You must be registered to see links
loop over the array indexes
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 752
Ultimately the best way for you to iterate over the array depends on what kind of content you have in there - e.g. whether they're meant to repeat or be used only once, but here's one approach assuming messages are something that appear at random times and do get shown only once.
You must be registered to see links
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 236
How can make it infinite loop? Haven't check the codes tho
--
am looking for something that works like this
You must be registered to see links
however, I don't wish to include an additional script. Looking for a pure direct jquery method.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 752
Just code that damn ring buffer yourself, it'll do good for you. 
For an extremely naive solution though that will work in 10 seconds (that you should not consider a proper implementation and never quote on me telling you to write it like that), on every iteration just shift out the first element from the array and when you're done with it just push it back to the end of the array. (like that:
Let me repeat, it's a bad solution in the general case because it has has terrible performance implications AND it's extremely vulnerable to concurrency issues should it be implemented on a platform that supports concurrent executions.
For an extremely naive solution though that will work in 10 seconds (that you should not consider a proper implementation and never quote on me telling you to write it like that), on every iteration just shift out the first element from the array and when you're done with it just push it back to the end of the array. (like that:
You must be registered to see links
) Let me repeat, it's a bad solution in the general case because it has has terrible performance implications AND it's extremely vulnerable to concurrency issues should it be implemented on a platform that supports concurrent executions.
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2009
- Messages
- 1,387
- Reaction score
- 236
Just code that damn ring buffer yourself, it'll do good for you.
For an extremely naive solution though that will work in 10 seconds (that you should not consider a proper implementation and never quote on me telling you to write it like that), on every iteration just shift out the first element from the array and when you're done with it just push it back to the end of the array. (like that:You must be registered to see links)
Let me repeat, it's a bad solution in the general case because it has has terrible performance implications AND it's extremely vulnerable to concurrency issues should it be implemented on a platform that supports concurrent executions.
You must be registered to see links
i bet this one is better
right?
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2004
- Messages
- 3,828
- Reaction score
- 752
Better in what terms? Sure it can be void of the theoretical performance issue depending on the implementation of jQuery's find and/or CSS selectors - in this case I doubt it is.
What's more troubling to me is that now your responsibilities are all messed up as you're using the view as data storage, and note this is what you should worry about rather than what I said above if you want to write better code. Besides, it will break as soon as you add or remove elements or fiddle with timings so you have a maintainability issue there. It's a pretty sweet hack you have there though I'll give you that
What's more troubling to me is that now your responsibilities are all messed up as you're using the view as data storage, and note this is what you should worry about rather than what I said above if you want to write better code. Besides, it will break as soon as you add or remove elements or fiddle with timings so you have a maintainability issue there. It's a pretty sweet hack you have there though I'll give you that
RaGEZONE Sponsor
