Help with setTimeout...

[Mool]

I want to use a setTimeout to just loop for a number of seconds, then
fall through to the next bit of code...can this be done by using some
kind of null in the statement, or do I have to assign the code a name
and call it from the setTimeout once it's done?

Thanks so much!

[MikeB]

"Mool" <Th*********@TheVillage.Net> wrote in message
news:9b********************************@4ax.com...

I want to use a setTimeout to just loop for a number of seconds, then
fall through to the next bit of code...can this be done by using some
kind of null in the statement, or do I have to assign the code a name
and call it from the setTimeout once it's done?
You could set a global variable to 'False' and have the function assigned to
setTimeout change it to 'True', then in your loop check for the 'True' condition
and break..
Thanks so much!

[Lee]

Mool said:

I want to use a setTimeout to just loop for a number of seconds, then
fall through to the next bit of code...can this be done by using some
kind of null in the statement, or do I have to assign the code a name
and call it from the setTimeout once it's done?

That's not very clear, but it sounds as if you misunderstand
what setTimeout() does. It doesn't loop. It doesn't cause
execution to pause. It simply schedules a task to be performed
after a delay. If you use it to schedule some kind of null,
then that some kind of null will be scheduled to happen after a
delay, but in the meantime, the next bit of code will already be
running.

In short, you do need to write the code as a function and schedule
it using setTimeout().

[Dr John Stockton]

JRS: In article <9b********************************@4ax.com>, seen in
news:comp.lang.javascript, Mool <Th*********@TheVillage.Net> posted at
Sat, 10 Jul 2004 07:24:22 :

I want to use a setTimeout to just loop for a number of seconds, then
fall through to the next bit of code...can this be done by using some
kind of null in the statement, or do I have to assign the code a name
and call it from the setTimeout once it's done?

You are asking for setTimeout to cause a delay in the current line of
execution (you don't give a location, so I suppose we can rely on your
words meaning what you intend). That was OK in single-process systems
such as ran in plain DOS, but not appropriate in typical GUI
environments.

You should arrange for the initial line of execution to call
setTimeout() and then to terminate naturally. The later code is
provided as the first parameter of setTimeout(); AIUI it can be
anything, but it should be a short string. In this case, a function
call invoking the rest of the code is appropriate.

Basically, a total redesign that changes very little.

This is about the shortest possible example ( -88 in USA, -887 in EU ? )

<input type=button onClick="setTimeout('alert(999)', 1000)">

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://jibbering.com/faq/> JL / RC : FAQ for news:comp.lang.javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

[Grant Wagner]

Lee wrote:

Mool said:

I want to use a setTimeout to just loop for a number of seconds, then
fall through to the next bit of code...can this be done by using some
kind of null in the statement, or do I have to assign the code a name
and call it from the setTimeout once it's done?

That's not very clear, but it sounds as if you misunderstand
what setTimeout() does. It doesn't loop. It doesn't cause
execution to pause. It simply schedules a task to be performed
after a delay. If you use it to schedule some kind of null,
then that some kind of null will be scheduled to happen after a
delay, but in the meantime, the next bit of code will already be
running.

In short, you do need to write the code as a function and schedule
it using setTimeout().

setTimeout() can be used as a hack to introduce a delay into Javascript
code:

function first() {
// do stuff
var t = setTimeout(second, 3000);
}
function second() {
// do more stuff
var t = setTimeout(third, 5000);
}
function third() {
// do yet more stuff
}

but anytime you are doing this, it is almost certainly the wrong way to
handle whatever you are doing. Javascript is an event driven environment,
waiting for a set period of time for something to happen (or not happen)
is almost always the wrong way to solve whatever problem you think you're
having.

Provide more details of why you think you need to do this, I'm sure a
solution can be provided that doesn't require your users to wait 3 or 5
seconds for something to happen.

--
Grant Wagner <gw*****@agricoreunited.com>
comp.lang.javascript FAQ - http://jibbering.com/faq