zenorocha / multiple-3rd-party-widgets.js
Last active

Embed URL

HTTPS clone URL

SSH clone URL

You can clone with HTTPS or SSH.

Download Gist

Loading multiple 3rd party widgets asynchronously

View multiple-3rd-party-widgets.js
Raw
File suppressed. Click to show.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 
(function() {

    

    var script,

        scripts = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0];

        

    function load(url) {

      script = document.createElement('script');

      script.async = true;

      script.src = url;

      scripts.parentNode.insertBefore(script, scripts);

    }

    

    load('//apis.google.com/js/plusone.js');

    load('//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js');

    load('//s.widgetsite.com/widget.js');

    

}());
mgoulart commented

If there's no previous script tag on the page, won't scripts.parentNode throw a (Cannot read property parentNode of undefined) error ?

also any for in loop should use hasOwnProperty to protect for any prototype modifications on the page.

Owner
zenorocha commented

1) You're always going to have a script tag on the page, because you need to add the script above somehow

mgoulart commented

Very true! Good point =)

You also might want to wrap this in a function to protect the variable namespaces.

eduardo-matos commented

As you don't use the object keys, maybe it would be better to loop an array instead (performance).

wesleyvicthor commented

common approach.

Owner
zenorocha commented

How about now?

harry1989 commented

Shouldn't

}());

be

})(); ?

thefrontender commented

@harry1989 Both are valid Javascript. But if you want an opinionated answer, try Crockford http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taaEzHI9xyY&feature=youtu.be#t=33m39s

jswebschmiede commented

i use a window onload version. look https://gist.github.com/jswebschmiede/3660918

coljung commented

Similar to this one: https://gist.github.com/necolas/1025811 , although i find that one much better.

franklinjavier commented

How about to pass the "document" as parameter into scope?

mingyun commented

good

3runoDesign commented

goood

kimmykuang commented

i think pass 'document' into scope is better

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.