As for the troll? Well I’m not big on deleting comments just because they are mean. Beyond that, you’re right in saying that what he’s suggesting isn’t wrong.

I’ve updated the top of this article with some additional learnings and a somewhat better way of handling intervals. Still not perfect, but a heck of a lot more robust.

The under the bridge dweller did make valid points in between his unnecessary insults.

Again, thanks. I enjoyed reading your write-up and the comments down the left. It is cool that you left even the negative stuff.

happy coding…

Doug

I do know what integers mean, but I’m glad you’re taking the time to make sure. They’re whole numbers in either a positive or negative state. This is not, I think, what you’re upset about though.

To put things into context. The reason this post came around was due to a legitimate bug in my code, wherein I wasn’t clearing the interval before setting it. This was my bad, but due to the architecture I couldn’t just set all the intervals in new variables, because that would have just been silly. This post came about because of the behaviour and limitations of the browser in accessing intervals for whom you’ve lost the reference.

However, you’ve somewhat missed the mark on my issue here. Because setInterval creates a running thread, and you store an integer reference in the variable, that’s all you have to cancel it. There isn’t a way to gain access to a setInterval controller, and so if you overwrite the variable storing the reference, you’re boned. the interval will run forever, and you’re stuck with it. My suggestion of using an external flag to kill a setInterval means that at least if the reference is lost, you have an external kill switch.

Thank you for your constructive criticism, lovely Internet man, and hope you go on to live a long and fulfilling life :)

Are you insane? “attaching” and “stacks the calls into the variable”? what the [fudgesticks] does that mean? It just returns an integer. You know what an integer is, right?

You can’t hold two integers in a single variable. The solution is simple: STORE THE REFERENCES IN SEPARATE VARIABLES!

intervalOne = setInterval(dosomething, 1000);
intervalTwo = setInterval(dosomethingelse, 1000);

clearInterval(intervalOne);
clearInterval(intervalTwo);

You clearly don’t understand the rudimentary [stuff]. Go back to basics.

Pretty simple

Things I do remember:
- creating document libraries and document types based on the wiki library and wiki types (these have hard-coded ids, and you can ONLY do this via a feature activation xml)
- A lot of physical page duplication and renaming
- Altering said pages with custom submit buttons
- pretty sure I attached custom functions to the create/ update/ etc of my custom doc types
- Sacrificing small animals to dark undergods (this may or may not be true, as I said, times were hazy then)

I was aware of the variation on the PC, but even that isn’t that much of an improvement. It’s less clicking but you’ll eventually crush your mouse button.

On the button mashing point, I just want to point out that its slightly different on the PC in that in order to attack all you have to do is hold down LMB and you’ll continuously attack whatever you’ve targeted or, if you’re glued to the spot, in the direction you’re pointing. You’ll probably still end up mashing RMB for whatever spell/ability you’ve got hotkeyed there.