Digg

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

15 Javascript Snippets You Can't Live Without

igglo.co.uk — "You either love Javascript or you hate it. Either way it can provide great functionality that users love. And it doesn't have to affect usability. Here are my top 15 Javascript snippits for making great sites that bit extra special."

Bury

ratpack 1 year 102 days ago, made popular 1 year 101 days ago

2523 diggs
digg it

119 Comments
Who Dugg It?
Blog It
Email It

ggidster, on 10/12/2007, -7/+15Some useful snippets there. Just be careful to keep half a mind on accessibility. Many browsers (sometimes because of corporate policy) have JS switched off, so some kind of alternative option if the user doesn't have JS is recommended........
- mr1337, on 10/12/2007, -47/+8I keep the NoScript addon for Firefox enabled at all times, so any Javascript that runs I have to approve first. My buddy got his credit card and address compromised through malicious Javascript. I highly recommend NoScript.
- UO07, on 10/12/2007, -15/+22You just lost 10 'cool' points for saying "snippet".
- onixxino, on 10/12/2007, -8/+55I'm sick of all of these "...snipplets you can't live without". As a matter of fact, I CAN live without them. While some of these summaries are useful, the most are just blog spams.
  
  It seems like people just try to find the coolest/newest/silckest snippets and somehow stuck them into their website. No, this is not how software design works. The proper way is: 1) Design your system and figure out what features you need, 2) Look on the Internet packages (snipplets) that might fit or 3) write one your own.
- fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+21Your buddy didn't get compromised because of JavaScript, he got compromised because he was on ***** sites that exploit idiots. What was he "buying" while downloading "cracks"?
- NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -1/+35mr1337,
  You manually approve every script that runs? So what happens when you come upon a script you've never seen before? You examine the source code to ensure there are no vulnerabilities? I'd imagine that would get old after the first three thousand scripts.
- fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -26/+7@ NanoStuff -
  Firefox users are desperate to feel like they're in control of the internet and the web will bend and shape itself to fit their vision of what it should be. It's best to just leave them alone and ignore their ever-present whining (it's like tinnitus, web 2.0 style).
  
  Sooner or later they'll realise Flash, JavaScript and all forms of advertising aren't going to leave the web before they do.
- DarknessGP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12I agree with onixxino. Hell, the last "top 10 firefox extensions you can't live without" ended up being like an RSS reader, a plugin for adding to your blog, etc. And honestly, I never used any of the plugins it said I couldn't live without. Actually, that list didn't even include Adblock Plus or Fasterfox (set to Optimized) Two plugins I'd consider that I couldn't live without...
  
  Anyways, back to the task at hand. A little info up front, I'm a software/web developer at a small/medium company. We host around 100 or so web sites with everything ranging from Classic ASP VBScript to Coldfusion to PHP to ASP .NET and I looked over the list, and honestly I have never had a need or a desire to have any of these functions. Perhaps for a personal site, I might see the benefit of a handful that are on the list, but as a tech professional, I can confidently say that this list is definitely not something you "can't live without"
- Soapdish, on 10/12/2007, -7/+3I apologize for my blasphemy in advance, but...
  
  I can actually live without my computer (gasp!) I'd just lose nice conveniences like email, and music in a fast-searching library.
- NanoStuff, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9soapdish,
  
  If you're incapable of finding uses for a computer beyond music and e-mail, you should be concerned about the processing capabilities of that little prune inside your head rather than trying to justify your technological incompetence.
- Gizza, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5The worst is when they use it for images. So you cant open the image up in a new FF tab. I HATE that.
- resplence, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I knew this was going to be weak when it said "And it doesn't have to affect usability".
  
  The words of someone who's been trying to 'catch up with all this web 2.0 stuff', overheard "javascript" and "usability" being used in the same context but is not exactly sure how to reproduce it.
- Eloom123, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@NanoStuff
  NoScript is a great extension, I use it all the time and believe that controlling what scripts are running on your system is essential in order to surf the web safely. NoScript will stop all scripts from running, and will prompt you to allow each site to run scripts individually, it does not work on a script by script basis as you imply. So once you allow a site, if that site changes the script it is running, you don't have to allow it again.
  
  It is quite common to browse to a site whose scripts you want to allow, but you don't want externally hosted scripts to be running, such as the scripts of their advertisers. It also allows you to browse to sites which you know have malicious scripts safely. Yes it can be annoying, but that's a price you pay to be secure.
- erikpols, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"without the overhead of Scriptaculous"...
  
  You mean there is a library that does what your code does and more? Please, can I have the link!
  /irony
  
  Yea I can live without those lists as well.If I need something simple I'll make it myself. If not, I'll use (indeed) Scriptaculous.
- rompom7, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@onixxino: This is a case of a bad digg title.. If you read, the actual article the title is:
  
  15 Javascript Snippets (You Probably CAN Live Without)
  
  EDIT: It appears I'm looking at a lo-fi version, I checked the cache and it did indeed state the aforementioned hyperbole. Never mind my retardedness.
wingnut21, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12"You either love Javascript or you hate it."

Why would someone hate (properly used) javascript?!
- zephc, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Basic types are sorely lacking a number of handy methods. I end up implementing convenience methods on the Array and String prototypes to make life easier.
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@wingnut21 (#5890218)
  
  The more I learn about JS the more I like about the language. Some of the syntax is awkward or strange but the language itself is pretty pleasant (especially with a stdlib-type library such as prototype or dojo).
- drmangrum, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5What is strange or awkward about the syntax? It's nearly identical to Java/C/C++? Unless you've been using nothing but VB, perl, and php, it's a very standard syntax model.
- MrSarcasm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2because 11-year-old have used too much blinking and pop-ups designing "websites" few years ago :|
- nofxjunkee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@drmangrum (#5892950)
  
  The C-like syntax is just fine. Like you said every programmer will be familiar with it. It's writing OO code that I find strange sometimes what with the prototype-based inheritance and such.
- jasg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@wingnut21
  
  Because they are morons ?..you do know that they exist ?
  please digg this http://digg.com/programming/Top_10_Myths_about_JavaScript
  and enlighten all.
Sonic_Molson, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8http://duggmirror.com/programming/15_Javascript_Snippets_You_Can_t_Live_Without/
Fatality, on 10/12/2007, -33/+2Javascript is a whore that gets used extensively in generating annoying pop-up ads or annoying scripts that get in the way of browsing in general. Also used to exploit browsers in the past.
- UO07, on 10/12/2007, -7/+30You must hate digg then, most of the stuff you see on the site is done via Javascript.
- picto, on 10/12/2007, -13/+6@UO07
  
  No...digg uses javascript in a smart, unobtrusive manner. My idea of javascript usage is to enhance the user interface design, not define it.
- fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -6/+45Digg doesn't use JavaScript in a smart way. Digg cut & pasted several bulky libraries in so it could do the most with the least amount of their effort. As a result a pageview includes 100's of kilobytes of JavaScript.
  
  If digg used JavaScript the "smart" way they'd write their own that does only and exactly what they do at a fraction of the bandwidth cost and a significantly faster load time for everyone who views the site. 3 versions later it's obvious they care more about transitioning from a news site to a funny links site.
  
  It's a bit of a stretch to consider 100's of kilobytes "unobtrusive" too.
- picto, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Alright, so let me rephrase: it's the actual interaction of the UI. I'm talking about what the javascript does on a basis of usability, rather than how efficient the javascript is. Yes, I agree that the physical implementation is bulky, obtrusive and smart from an efficiency standpoint but regardless of the efficiency concerns, the interaction it provides to the interface in a usability sense is done in a smart way (i.e. hiding things you may not want to see).
  
  I should've made that clear from the start...but hey, I'm a usability guy so I was quick to assume.
- robomason, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5@ fkr3
  
  According to Firebug, a load of the front page of Digg loads up 66KB of Javascript files, the largest of which is the 13KB Prototype library, and some of which is loaded by the Google ads that inevitably appear on every page.
  
  Now, Digg doesn't exactly use the leanest, meanest Javascript around, but I certainly wouldn't go as far as to say that it's bulky. It's really just a few kilobytes of Digg-specific code, and Prototype and portions of the Scriptaculous library. 66KB is hardly "100s of kilobytes."
  
  Why should Digg developers reinvent the wheel when there are already two fantastic, free libraries available for them to use? So they might sacrifice some 10KB or something appropriately minuscule, but developer time is expensive and error-prone, so the trade-off seems wise to me.
- fkr3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19/js/7/digg.js - 14,077 bytes
  /js/7/label.js - 3,082 bytes
  /js/7/prototype.js - 46,817 bytes
  /js/7/scriptaculous.js - 2,370
  /js/7/comments.js - 7,257
  /js/7/spellChecker.js - 8,261
  
  Total: 81,861kb
  
  It looks like they've trimmed it down significantly some time in the last month or two. Regardless, for what boils down to sliding divs in/out, changing css class names, fading a number in/out and ajax requests that's a ridiculous amount of JavaScript.
  
  Google Maps appears to function on 1/3 that volume of JavaScript (36,391 bytes).
- GrahamStw, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8@fkr3
  
  > Total: 81,861kb
  
  The js scripts are served up as gzip compressed (presumably via mod_gzip or mod_deflate).
  You can check this by using a tool like http://www.port80software.com/products/httpzip/compresscheck
  
  So actually the downloaded sizes break down as:
  
  /js/7/digg.js - 4,707 bytes
  /js/7/label.js - 3,059 bytes (uncompressed)
  /js/7/prototype.js - 12,330 bytes
  /js/7/scriptaculous.js - 1,254 bytes
  /js/7/comments.js - 2,018 bytes
  /js/7/spellChecker.js - 1,993 bytes
  
  Total: 25,361 bytes
  
  Also the scripts are served with "Cache-Control" and "Expires" HTTP headers set for 10 years - so they should only be downloaded the first time you visit digg and then be cached by the browser for all subsequent pages.
  
  So "a pageview includes 100's of kilobytes of JavaScript" should really read "the first page view includes 25KiB of JavaScript".
- IEatHamburgers, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7@fkr3:
  80MB of Javascript? Holy ***** is Digg screwed up!
Jazazze, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Meh, I was trying to post a comment on there when it died. :(
thailand1972, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5More like "15 Javascript Snippets To Make Your Website Inaccessible".

Drag and drop shopping baskets? Draggable Windows? How to do without a mouse?

Also, no mention on the page about the importance of degrading these tools (i.e. have an alternative without javascript).

I don't "love or hate javascript" - I use where appropriate.
- Ruhtar, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0I agree thailand1972, except for the "A List Apart" map effect http://www.alistapart.com/articles/cssmaps.
  
  But, it is a toss up as to which is worse, not taking accessibility into account or using Javascript in such a way that sites become unusable without it.
  
  I mean from a lack of forethought point of view. Too many people think that because they can do a thing, they should do a thing without considering the possible downside. Hopefully as time goes on though, sites where little thought was given to usability will see less and less traffic to the point of people finally getting the message.
picto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Alright...so the problem I have is that some kid is gonna see this and go "Wow! Javascript windows inside the browser!" and then go to town using it just because he can. Javascript is a great tool...but oftentimes is considerably overused. If you're trying to put together an application/blog/website where you want to maximize the number of users you've got to say "This site requires javascript to be enabled" as an absolute last resort. This is not to say that you have to try to do everything without javascript (i.e. some features would be disabled), but it shouldn't be the key component of your application/blog/website.
- skinjester, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Google Maps seems like a pretty useful resource for me anyway, but might be even better if the browser had to refresh whenever I wanted to navigate.
- picto, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2So Google Maps is one of those examples that is extensively built around javascript. But like I said, it's one of those "This site requires javascript to be enabled" moments. And that's not bad at all...the interaction Google Maps provided is what set it apart from sites like mapquest. I would say if the overall gained utility for an average user to use the application is greater than the cost to actually enable javascript, then you could safely call it a "This site requires..." moment.
- Ruhtar, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0If Google maps had been implemented intelligently, they would work, albeit at reduced convenience, with Javascript turned off, which of course would require a page load but at least they would still work.
  
  Anyone who has used Google's Group forums likely knows that one can not even post a new thread or reply without Javascript turned on yet at the same time, to see one's post, one has to click to go back to the discussion and then click to go back to the thread, possibly 3 or 4 times before actually seeing the post show up. Not a good idea that, make Javascript required to even post but then not use Javascript in an intelligent manner to reduce the back and forth one has to go through just to see what one just posted.
  
  Google wrote the book on how NOT to support usability and accessibility.
Casestheorm, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Right, that's it. Next person to say 'X Y Z you can't live without' is going to find out what *they* can't live without...and fast.
thailand1972, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"This site requires javascript to be enabled" as an absolute last resort."

Couldn't agree more picto. A lot of people put "kewl" ahead of robust design. Probably the same kind of person digging down all the common sense posts in this thread :)
vann, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Eh, this seems like something that was written just to get dugg. It's mostly a list of JavaScript library demos from around the web, not quite what I'd call "snippets." Even so, JavaScript is a language that gets snippited to death, in my opinion. What I mean is that there are basically two attitudes about JavaScript: one, it's an easy way to manipulate the DOM with little snippets of code; two, it's a hacky language, less powerful than "real" languages like C++, Python, or whatever.

Both parties miss a lot, though, because JavaScript is actually a very expressive language. The snippeters don't use the full expressiveness of the language and the more hardcore programmers see the snippets and conclude that JavaScript is hackish. People see JavaScript as somehow being Java lite or C++ lite, but it has a very strong functional aspect.
For the CS geeks out there, it is possible to write a one-line Y combinator in JavaScript.

http://digg.com/programming/The_Philosophy_of_JavaScript is a pretty good article that touches on some of the object-oriented aspects of JavaScript, in the vein of Douglas Crockford.
Sradha, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Right, that's it. Next person to say 'X Y Z you can't live without' is going to find out what *they* can't live without...and fast.

Right, that's it. Next person to say 'X Y Z you can't live without' is going to find out what *they* can't live without...and fast.

Right, that's it. Next person to say 'X Y Z you can't live without' is going to find out what *they* can't live without...and fast.
Hamsterpotpies, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I lived without them till now. I'm still living without them. I looked, noticed the uselessness of them, then closed the tab.
- foamcow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2To be fair there are a couple of useful things in there.
  The resize detection is handy and non-intrusive (assuming it's the ALA one - can't check, site's down)
  Can't recall what else was there now.
planckstudios, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Ew. The dissonant diagonals on that blog made me sick.
nubnub, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1Javascript is evil
- vann, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8Yes, but it is deliciously evil. Mmmmm...
- foamcow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1evil javascript is evil
  
  good javascript ***** roses
kkalyan, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1why can't you live without ?
- nikhil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0you can definitely live without them though they might prove somewhat handy but you can live without them.
  Regards,
  Nikhil
robsonde, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1how about spending less time make cool javascript that 90% of can live with out and spend more time making your site a bit more able to take the digg effect.

site down = no digg
- Anonymous3, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0I wonder if there is some offsite dump for javascript, since we can offsite images to imageshack, give feedburner our rss feeds, just to stop people from hammering sites as much. I should look around for some options :)
  
  edit: archive.org saves javascript, so I guess that could be a way to offsite some non-essential stuff.
LavaIce, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4There is nothing wrong with JavaScript, just with how some people use it. I recommend reading "DOM Scripting: Web Design with JavaScript and the Document Object Model" by Jeremy Keith. JavaScript can be used as another layer to web to add additional functionality while degrading cleanly and allowing users without it access, and this just does not cover corporate policy that has it disabled but also mobile browsers, and screen readers. Additionally, with modern scripting techniques you don't ever have to include JavaScript inline you can treat it much the same as you do CSS and have it reside in an external file. Also, Jeremy outlines in his book that you no longer need to do browser detection you only need to test for the particular features before you use them to allow degrading to base functionality.
TexanPsycho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Future news: "10 Lists You Can Live Without"
Zipp425, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3It makes me sad when things like this reach the frontpage.
- GotMex, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I believe god kills a kitten everytime stuff like this makes it to the front
rmaxrocks, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3An end user doesn't wanna know how it works.. If he's curious enough then he'll find out anyway. I think the whole point in implementing javascript and AJAX is to please the end-user. Thats what digg does - please and ease. If digg was like a BB forum, it wouldnt get this much attraction.
tybris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Always up for a challenge....

....

nope..still alive.
foamcow, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2In Soviet Russia, Javascript lives without you!

Hooray for cargo-cult programming.
GotMex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The calendar looked cool for a bit... until a realized that the license I would need to use it in my sites would cost me $499 dollars. I can get Photoshop for that kind of money... Rip-off
- GrahamStw, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@GotMex:
  
  "The DHTML / JavaScript Calendar - Best and open-source
  This program is available under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License version 2.1 or above."
  
  It's only the Zapatec version that costs.
- GotMex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wanted to deploy it on an intranet system. That's why I can't use the GNU licensed version. Also the script is about 35kb, major bloat for a calendar in the end.
- smackhero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1get a programming book and learn how to write your own applications if you're gonna be a web developer. this isn't the 90's where web design/development meant taking an intro class at a junior college and having good connections. skilled web developers who are worth the kind of pay that draws people to web development are in pretty good supply. if you don't want to learn how to program, then it's time to find a different profession.
swiftsam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1when it comes to javascript tools, spend a little while learning how powerful jQuery is, and then see if you still need 15 other 'snippets'. jQuery is amazing www.jquery.com
howdesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Here's a clever javascript for zoomable photos and other elements. First saw the technique on Freep.com.

http://vikjavev.no/highslide/
PatrickB, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Sorry, I could live without these scripts!
DangerMouse9, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I haven't had them yet and I'm still alive. Buried as inaccurate.
dupswapdrop, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Hey wheres the 10 list 0f 10 lists that list 10 lists?
Bleeblaow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1How have I lived for twenty-two years without these fifteen Javascript snippets?
SquireToad, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Too bad more of them couldn't have been free. Pointers to overpriced trialware leave me cold. Buried.
DenDen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Everyone that dugg this is an amateur that likes to put garbage on their site.
- dwiezel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What tools and components do you use for interactive web development, AJAX, etc. ???
locnguyen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is there a free version of the dynamic tables anywhere?
dwiezel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Anybody know what is up with dynarch.com? I may be interested in the calendar/date picker and the tabbed roll bar depending upon look and feel, behavior, etc. ???

An alternative link would be greatly appreciated...
- sfcengiz, on 01/17/2008, -0/+0http://www.cengizler.net
daonlyfreez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I love JavaScript for quick browsing automation.

Here is a simple JavaScript I use as a bookmark/favelet to trigger any "Next" link in a webpage, works in Google and Digg.

javascript:ae=document.getElementsByTagName("a"); for (var i = 0; i < ae.length; i++) if (ae[i].innerHTML.indexOf("Next") >= 0) window.location.href = ae[i].href;

Very nice as a "button" in your personal bar in Opera for example. Could be easily adapted to accept more links (like lower-case "next" etcet.)
- Vindstille, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1daonlyfreez: What about setting a in your html-document. Then people can use the dobble arrows in Opera to switch back and forward.
- daonlyfreez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Err, I cannot change the html of a site I don't own. I know what you mean, yet the javascript works on all sites with the specific linkname, and on all browsers (I think), not only in Opera.
  
  This way, I can use a trigger (bookmarklet or scripting the pasting into address bar of browser and pressing enter) to go to any page's "Next" without having to point my mouse at anything.
thesimo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1this is very nice thanks mr fritzthingy :)
quick5pnt0cobra, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'd be willing to be I can live without them.
Dustin00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Drag & Drop Shopping Cart"

UG! If I run into this on a site, I'm gone. A simple click is all that is needed and is far more accessable for people with disabilities.
andy113, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0personally when I'm designing sites, I tend to only use javascript if it'll add something to the site experience - I think we've all been on enough sites with pointless Javascript functions to know what is useful Javascript, and what is not.
tehbeermang, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0None of the snippets listed in the article are really "needed" in any application. Most are just gimmicks and stand in the way of information.

Amazon and Google have spent countless hours building a user experience that is tough to beat, the gimmicks don't stand in the way, the gimmicks make the intended application work.

Buried. This is lame.
sarahmaddelson, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Thanx a lot for the info. I couldn't see any graphics in IE7 or FF.
mvannatter, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Awesome. Sweet, dugg it.
divabox, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0I can't believe it! I've never thought it is for real.
demizu, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Impossible! Even if it's not true it is quite a nice idea.
dugumi, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0omg, I never knew about those
erdogduemlak, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1http://www.interlingua.de
http://www.eurolingua.de
http://www.iyibiremlak.com
http://www.emlaksahibi.com
http://www.ceviriservisi.com
http://www.prestijceviri.com
http://www.tercumehizmeti.com
http://www.tercumesiteleri.com
http://www.ingilizcetercumanlar.com
http://www.istanbulgayrimenkul.com
http://www.istanbuldegerleme.com
http://www.hemendevret.com
http://www.mustafaerdogdu.com
http://www.ilanemlak.com
http://www.tercumeservisi.com
http://www.tercumehizmeti.com
http://www.ceviriservisi.com
http://www.prestijceviri.com
http://www.tercumesiteleri.com
http://www.erdogduemlak.com/erdogdue/default.asp İngilizce
http://www.erdogduemlak.com/erdogdua/default.asp Almanca
nikhil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Ah ! the page is not loading for me.
- pchayat, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Thanks
  kale kapı
nikhil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Found it somehow. Some are good ones but not all are great ones and yes! you can live without them
Regards,
http://www.nikhilbansal.in/
nikhil88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Found them somehow. Some are good ones but not all are that great and yea ! you can live without them.
Regards,
Nikhil
http://www.nikhilbansal.in/
bilgisayar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+0http://www.erdogdubilgisayar.com http://www.nurceyizevtekstili.com http://www.antalyaotelleri.blogspot.com http://www.bjkonline.com
jashua01, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0keep up the your great work.
thank you.
http://www.nbatrky.com
http://djtiesto01.blogspot.com
http://alonzomourning.blogspot.com
Show 51 - 66 of 66 discussions
Login or register to add a comment

Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.

15 Javascript Snippets You Can't Live Without

Login or register to add a comment