| (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'); | |
| }()); |
1) You're always going to have a script tag on the page, because you need to add the script above somehow
Very true! Good point =)
You also might want to wrap this in a function to protect the variable namespaces.
As you don't use the object keys, maybe it would be better to loop an array instead (performance).
common approach.
How about now?
Shouldn't
}());
be
})(); ?
@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
i use a window onload version. look https://gist.github.com/jswebschmiede/3660918
Similar to this one: https://gist.github.com/necolas/1025811 , although i find that one much better.
How about to pass the "document" as parameter into scope?
good
goood
i think pass 'document' into scope is better
Nice
ty babe
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.