Thanks so much Mike!
Got it! :)
Cheers!
Alex
On Sep 2, 6:33 pm, "Michael Geary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No worries on being pedantic, Alex. If I'd been working 24 hours straight,
> I'd be worried I might understand a critical detail too.
>
> Yes, I do mean to have you concatenate all of jquery.js along with the
> plugin and your code into a single large .js file, and have your loader.js
> create a dynamic script element to load that single file (or a
> packed/minified/gzipped version of it).
>
> No, it won't cause you any problems to concatenate jquery.js along with your
> other files. There's nothing special about jquery.js; it's just a .js file
> like any other.
>
> There is one problem you can run into when you concatenate files. If one
> source file has a missing semicolon at the very end, then when you append
> another file, the JS interpreter may combine statements in a way you didn't
> intend.
>
> This shouldn't be a problem for jquery.js and a typical plugin, but it you
> want to be absolutely sure, simply add a ; between each source file. You can
> make that part of a separator line if you want, perhaps like this:
>
> ;//--------------------------------------------------------
>
> jquery.js goes here
>
> ;//--------------------------------------------------------
>
> Plugin goes here
>
> ;//--------------------------------------------------------
>
> Your script goes here
>
> ;//--------------------------------------------------------
>
> That way you get a nice visual separation between the scripts, and the extra
> semicolons won't hurt anything.
>
> -Mike
>
> > From: Alex Weber
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 2:07 PM
> > To: jQuery (English)
> > Subject: [jQuery] Re: best techniques to optimize loading of
> > multiple libraries?
>
> > Thanks again Mike!
>
> > I reckon I have it down to a 'T' now! :)
>
> > Just one doubt (sorry i've taken so much of your time already!):
>
> > When you say:
> > "Concatenate all of your scripts into a single file."
>
> > Do you mean the entire jquery library as well?
>
> > Is this feasible? Like, copy and paste the entire jquery
> > library (uncompressed), one plugin, and my custom code into
> > one huge .js file and then pack or minify it?
> > And host it somewhere fast like cachefly?
>
> > I can see doing this for the plugin and my custom js but
> > jquery also seems asking for trouble no?
>
> > Or am i not getting it? Did you mean dynamically append "loader.js"
> > in the main document body, and then in loader.js have 3
> > separate <script src>? (wait does that even work?) sorry its
> > late here ive been on a crazy reching on 24 hour work bender.... :S
>
> > Thanks again and sorry for being so pedantic!!
>
> > Alex
>
> > On Sep 2, 4:40 pm, "Michael Geary" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > From: Alex Weber
>
> > > > So just to clear things up, you prefer using document.write() to
> > > > insert <script> tags instead of appending the elements to the DOM:
>
> > > > var finan = document.createElement('script');
> > > > finan.type = 'text/javascript';
> > > > finan.src =
> > > > 'http://www.mydomain.com/js/mts_finan.js';
> > > > head.appendChild(finan);
>
> > > > i guess its more efficient because you don't have to access the
> > > > document object, but any other particular reasons?
>
> > > No, that isn't the reason at all. It's because it makes the
> > code much
> > > simpler. You don't have to write any code to load the
> > scripts in their
> > > proper sequence; it happens automatically. <script> tags
> > are evaluated
> > > in the order they appear in the source code, and code you add with
> > > document.write is inserted immediately after the end of the
> > script tag
> > > that does the document.write.
>
> > > Dynamically inserting a script element with
> > createElement/appendChild
> > > is a great technique - in fact it's the basis for the popular JSONP
> > > method of cross-domain JSON downloads - but it doesn't
> > automatically
> > > tell you when the script is loaded. That why your developer
> > wrote that
> > > repeating interval code
> > > - to check when each script is ready and load the next one
> > in sequence.
>
> > > > Awesome, one huge problem out of the way!
>
> > > Well, maybe, maybe not... :-) See below...
>
> > > > We're currently at a point where our server isn't exactly being
> > > > overloaded so i think its safe to host jquery.min on
> > google code and
> > > > the plugin (yet to be minified) and custom code possibly
> > combined in
> > > > 1 file, since there won't be a lot of custom code to begin with.
>
> > > > Also, to satisfy your curiosity, the whole purpose of using the
> > > > mts_load.js function is because this code is a part of a banner
> > > > we're planning to distribute and host in numerous
> > websites, so a lot
> > > > of them won't want scripts other than their own embedded
> > directly,
> > > > so we found that calling one simple function (mts_load)
> > that would
> > > > to all the dirty work was acceptable with them :)
>
> > > When I recommended document.write, I wasn't really thinking
> > about the
> > > whole context. There may be one good reason to use the
> > dynamic script
> > > elements instead. When you document.write the script tags,
> > the browser
> > > will wait while those script files are loaded. If you use dynamic
> > > script elements, the browser continues loading the rest of the page
> > > while the additional scripts are loaded. The only script it
> > waits for
> > > is the main loader script which is loaded with a script tag.
>
> > > If this behavior is what you want, then you can still get
> > it without
> > > all the timers and extra complication. Concatenate all of
> > your scripts
> > > (except the loader itself) into a single file. Then simply use a
> > > single dynamic script element to load that entire script. You don't
> > > need any timers or sequencing that way. Simply load that one big
> > > script, and the code in it will run in the order you expect. Very
> > > simple, and you still get the benefit of letting the page continue
> > > loading while the secondary scripts are fetched asynchronously.
>
> > > -Mike
