The Weird and The Wonderful

22-Jul-24 12:22

While working on a SPA I had some CSS that I was applying on the click of a button.
When the button was clicked, it would make one or the other DIVs go fullscreen (except for a small portion at the top where the nav bar was).

Imagine you have these two divs -- one yellow and one cyan;

CSS

#first{
  background: yellow;
}

#second{
  background: cyan;
}

Then when you click a button in the navbar it would make one or the other go fullscreen by applying a fullscreen CSS class.
It worked great & I was very happy with the simplicity of it all.
If you really want to see it work (toggle), take a look at this simple jsfiddle[^].

CSS

.fullScreen{
  width: 100%;
  height: 90%;
  z-index: 20;
  position: absolute;
  top: 12%;
  padding: 10pt;
}

Here's the button click code.

JavaScript

// select the div and add the style
document.querySelector("#first").classList.add("fullScreen");
// remove style from other div so it isn't fullscreen
document.querySelector("#second").classList.remove("fullScreen");
// vice versa for the other div -- not showing all the toggle code

It Worked, Then Didn't!
It was all working. I copied the code to another project and had it all set up.
But suddenly clicking the button wouldn't do the fullscreen. I tried all manner of things.
Was the button click working? I added an alert() and saw the button was working.
I was going out of my bleedin' mind.
Then I looked real hard at the styles that I had copied to the new project.
Can You See It?
Do you see the problem?

CSS

#first{
  background: yellow;
}

#second{
  background: cyan;
};

.fullScreen{
  width: 100%;
  height: 90%;
  z-index: 20;
  position: absolute;
  top: 12%;
  padding: 10pt;
}

Oy!! I have only myself to blame.

As Sophocles said:
The keenest sorrow is to recognize ourselves as the sole cause of all our adversities.

Sophocles was obviously a software developer.

Jeremy Falcon22-Jul-24 14:19

22-Jul-24 14:19

raddevus wrote:
Do you see the problem?

Don't see the reason for it off the top of my head. Absolute should work with a static parent. Usually when stuff is not shown and it's not a display issue (or no content) then it's related to height. As body height needs to be set as well, etc. So that would be my guess.

Couple points about your code though...

I urge you to consider never, ever doing that again though. Laugh | :laugh:

You don't need to hard code offsets, as that'll just make things harder to maintain. And, this day and age we should be using flexbox for layout. And yes that includes fullscreen dialogs. It'll keep things organized sooo much better and if you ever need to stack a dialog on top of your main content or stack multiple dialogs, then it'll make your life easier.

Also, never, ever use height 100% in that manner. Smile | :)

There are better ways now. That was the trick 20 years ago. These days it's much, much better to use viewport units for layout. Height 100% means 100% of the parent. That trick only only worked when you set both the html and body tag to height 100%. I still set both html and body out of habit for viewport, but there's no need for that now. Just use viewport units with the added benefit of being semantic.

Also, consider using the semantic dialog tag. It'll fall back to a regular div on non-supported browsers. But if the intent is to have a fullscreen dialog show, then it'll help screen readers know what's up.

Tossed together a fiddle for poops and giggles. Clickety

Jeremy Falcon

modified 3 days ago.

raddevus23-Jul-24 2:44

23-Jul-24 2:44

Wow, thanks for the tips. I really appreciate it.
I was just going for the absolute quickest way I could get a div to go fullscreen.
I will examine the JSFiddle more closely and make some changes.

Thanks again.
Thumbs Up | :thumbsup:

Jeremy Falcon23-Jul-24 6:47

23-Jul-24 6:47

Any time, buddy.

Jeremy Falcon

Jeremy Falcon23-Jul-24 7:02

23-Jul-24 7:02

Just checked the fiddle again and there was a tiny bug in it with the hidden style. If the dialog tag is supported then most browsers apply an automatic user agent style to it. So, forgot to add padding and margin resets in the class.

This fixes it: Clickety. So should work if you apply the hidden class to either the popup or the main tag.

It's worth noting this isn't an modal or modeless overlay dialog anymore, but quite literately replaces the main content while still allowing for having a nav bar up top. If it were an overlay that just covered the whole thing (drop shadow etc.) then absolute positioning is the way to go. But, IMO overlays don't look nearly as modern as this does.

Jeremy Falcon

modified 3 days ago.

raddevus23-Jul-24 7:16

23-Jul-24 7:16

Thanks, I forked it and got to this which works for my needs[^].
I just need to "fullscreen" a div if the user wants to so the div can be seen / interacted with more easily on a phone.

Jeremy Falcon23-Jul-24 9:13

23-Jul-24 9:13

Noice

Jeremy Falcon

RickZeeland22-Jul-24 19:13

RickZeeland

22-Jul-24 19:13

Not a Javascript programmer, but I guess the extra semicolon?

raddevus23-Jul-24 2:43

23-Jul-24 2:43

You got it!

It was the semicolon located after the second style.

That just blew my mind! I will make no more mistakes with semicolons (he said doubting himself). Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

CSS

#first{
  background: yellow;
}

#second{
  background: cyan;
};  /* <=============  this semicolon makes the .fullScreen ineffective!!!! */

.fullScreen{
  width: 100%;
  height: 90%;
  z-index: 20;
  position: absolute;
  top: 12%;
  padding: 10pt;
}

Jeremy Falcon23-Jul-24 6:50

23-Jul-24 6:50

Ha ha ha ha ha. I totally missed that. Awesome catch.

Jeremy Falcon

Peter_in_278022-Jul-24 20:27

Peter_in_2780

22-Jul-24 20:27

Be thankful it's CSS not Python.
Then your bug would be invisible.

Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012

TNCaver23-Jul-24 10:22

TNCaver

23-Jul-24 10:22

I have similar code I used to swap between dark and light theme css file, selected via a checkbox:

JavaScript

function switchCssMode() {
    var chkMode = gebi("chkSwitchTheme");
    if (chkMode.checked) {
        document.querySelector("link[href='css/lite.css']").href = "css/dark.css";
    }
    else {
        document.querySelector("link[href='css/dark.css']").href = "css/lite.css";
    }
}
function gebi(el) {
    return document.getElementById(el);
}

There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas Sowell

A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)

Richard Deeming23-Jul-24 21:25

Richard Deeming

23-Jul-24 21:25

For modern browsers, you could do that without any JavaScript. Set up the colours to use as CSS variables / properties[^] in the :root context; use those variables throughout the stylesheet; and use the :has selector[^] to switch between dark and light themes. Smile | :)

CSS

:root {
    --background-color: white;
    --text-color: black;
}

body:has(input[id='chkSwitchTheme']:checked) {
    --background-color: black;
    --text-color: white;
}

Demo[^]

"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer

Linux C PreProcessor: Who Knew?

TNCaver24-Jul-24 4:09

TNCaver

24-Jul-24 4:09

Interesting, and good to know. I'm way behind on modern CSS.

There are no solutions, only trade-offs.
- Thomas Sowell

A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)

raddevus4-Jul-24 6:26

4-Jul-24 6:26

I'm going through a book right now which is fantastic!
It's the best intro to OSes (how they are designed/programmed) I believe you'll ever read.

First of all, you can read it for FREE online (PDFs).
Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces[^]

Have you read the book? It's fantastic because it starts out with simple code examples (in C) that teach one specific point at a time. Amazing!

If you've never read it, please skip all the (intro nonsense) & go right for the meat (to get an idea of how great the book is). Read this chapter[^] (be aware this will open the PDF in your browser) & I believe you'll be convinced how great the book is too.

And Now For the Weird & Wonderful
While examining the common_threads.h file for the 3rd example I stumbled upon these lines:

#ifdef __linux__
#include <semaphore.h>
#endif

I always wonder about strange things like that and in this case I thought, "Where is the __linux__ defined?"

I looked it up and discovered Gnu docs for the C PreCompiler (cpp exe)[^].

I tried the command they suggested:

$ cpp -dM

But when I did I could see that cpp was running but just had an empty string.

You actually have to point it at an exe and it'll pull out all the preprocessor commands. What!?!

$ cpp -dM ./threadx

When I ran that I saw a huge list of PreProcess commands. Huge!

I then ran it thru grep like this:

$ cpp -dM ./iox | grep -i linux

I saw the following!!

C++

#define __linux 1
#define __gnu_linux__ 1
#define linux 1
#define __linux__ 1

So, I can see that over the years the convention to determine which OS the compiler is running on has changed. WTF | :WTF:

Wow, things get messy as time goes on, don't they.

BONUS
Here's my favorite pre-processor define I found in the list. Roll eyes | :rolleyes:

C++

#define __FLT128_DENORM_MIN__ 6.47517511943802511092443895822764655e-4966F128

trønderen4-Jul-24 8:22

trønderen

4-Jul-24 8:22

raddevus wrote:
First of all, you can read it for FREE online (PDFs).
Operating Systems: Three Easy Pieces[^]

When I open the link, it tells me that the PDF version is USD 10. I am not that curious about the book.

Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.

Jalapeno Bob4-Jul-24 9:46

Jalapeno Bob

4-Jul-24 9:46

It opened for me, no messages. What browser are you using??

__________________
Lord, grant me the serenity to accept that there are some things I just can’t keep up with, the determination to keep up with the things I must keep up with, and the wisdom to find a good RSS feed from someone who keeps up with what I’d like to, but just don’t have the damn bandwidth to handle right now.
© 2009, Rex Hammock

raddevus4-Jul-24 10:14

4-Jul-24 10:14

I re-tried both links (the one to the book's main web site) and the one directly to the PDF & both worked for me.
Honestly the book is free so I hope you get a chance to take a look.
Someone else has confirmed that they links worked too.
Try the link to the main site and then try clicking the chapters in the grid. Maybe you'll be able to get it there.

Dave Kreskowiak4-Jul-24 9:37

Dave Kreskowiak

4-Jul-24 9:37

I've got the dead tree version on my shelf. It is a very good book.

Asking questions is a skill
CodeProject Forum Guidelines
Google: C# How to debug code
Seriously, go read these articles.
Dave Kreskowiak

raddevus4-Jul-24 10:16

4-Jul-24 10:16

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:
I've got the dead tree version on my shelf.

Very cool that you've read it.

I am really enjoying the code samples, because they :
1. touch on very basic but very clear topics
2. are self contained & don't require a lot to get them compiled.
3. Touch on important topics like file i/o, simple threading ideas, etc.

Really amazing book so far.

k50549-Jul-24 3:51

k5054

9-Jul-24 3:51

You can get a list of the compiler Manifest Defines via

Shell

echo | cc -dM -E -

In my case, I get 442 #defines for c++, and 380 for cc. Interestingly, the C compiler and the pre-processor produce exactly the same manifest defines.

Messing around with different C/C++ standards gets different values for different standard versions e.g -std=c89 or -std=gnu17 or -std=gnu++11, so might be worth inspecting, to see how you can tell whether you're compiling for C89, C99, or if you're using clang (#define __clang__), etc

"A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants"
Chuckles the clown

raddevus9-Jul-24 4:51