Is it possible to toggle the visibility of an element, using the functions `.hide()`, `.show()` or `.toggle()`?

How would you test if an element is `visible` or `hidden`?


How do I check if an element is hidden in jQuery?

The CSS rules `visibility:hidden` and `display:none` both result in the element not being visible. Are these synonyms?

What is the difference between visibility:hidden and display:none?

What are differences between `Visibility.Collapsed` and `Visibility.Hidden` in WPF?


Difference between Visibility.Collapsed and Visibility.Hidden

I have few div&#39;s placed underneath each other and I&#39;m using css visibility to fade them in and out. The reason why I use visibility is so that the div&#39;s don&#39;t move place.

For fade In I&#39;m using: 

    $(&#39;.drop1&#39;).css({opacity: 0.0, visibility: &quot;visible&quot;}).animate({opacity: 1.0});

and for fade Out I&#39;m using:

    $(&#39;.drop1&#39;).css({opacity: 0.0, visibility: &quot;hidden&quot;}).animate({opacity: 1.0})}, 200);


The **FadeIn works**, but the **fadeOut doesn&#39;t work**.

Now, you may think that the problem is the last &#39;**,200**&#39;  but I will need to use that as a delay since the fadeout/visibility:hidden is on mouseleave event after 200ms.


So my question is: How can I do the visibility hidden with animation to act as a fadeOut. 

Thanks alot

jQuery css Visibility with animation

I have a shared library project that is built from 4 static libraries (`.a`) and one object (`.o`) file. I am trying to add the `-fvisibility=hidden` option to restrict symbols in the output to only those that I mark in the source with an \__attribute\__.

I&#39;ve added the `-fvisibility=hidden` option to the compile options for the `.so` project (which covers the `.o` file) and for the `.a` projects.

The symbols in the object file are removed as expected from the final `.so`. However the symbols from the `.a` projects are all still in the final `.so` file. Adding the `-fvisibility=hidden` option to the `.so` link command has no effect.

What am I doing wrong?

My purpose here is to remove from the `.so` all symbols except the interface functions to the library.

EDIT: I actually used a [version map][1] to solve this for now. However it requires continued maintenance of the version script as external symbols change. Accepted answer has a better idea.


  [1]: http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2000-05/msg00305.html

How to apply -fvisibility option to symbols in static libraries?

&gt; **Possible Duplicate:**  
&gt; [Testing if something is hidden with jQuery](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/178325/testing-if-something-is-hidden-with-jquery)  

&lt;!-- End of automatically inserted text --&gt;

In jQuery, suppose you have an element of some kind that you&#39;re hiding and showing, using `.hide()`, `.show()` or `.toggle()`. How do you test to see if that element is currently hidden or visible on the screen?

How do i test if something is hidden with jQuery?

I want to make an instance variable that can&#39;t be accessed from outside. Is something like that possible in objective-c? I remember Apple has private variables and stuff like that, but if people know about them, they can use them. Apple calls that &quot;private API&quot;, but obviously others can access that stuff if they find out what&#39;s in there.

Until now I believed that something like this creates a private instance variable:

    @interface MyClass : NSObject {
        CGFloat weight;
    }

No @property, no @synthesize, just the declaration above.

Also I know Apple adds a _inFrontOfTheirPrivateInstanceVariables, but they said somewhere that they don&#39;t like to see others doing that because they might override accidently hidden instance variables when doing that.

What&#39;s the trick here?

How to make a real private instance variable?

Probably similar to the question, https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1801718/why-can-outer-java-classes-access-inner-class-private-members or https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31478718/access-to-superclass-private-fields-using-the-super-keyword-in-a-subclass .

But there are some differences: the children class can access the private members of their parent (and **only the nearest parent**) class.

Given the sample code below:
        
	public class T {

		private int t;

		class T1 {
			private int t1;

			public void test() {
				System.out.println(t);
			}
		}

		class T2 extends T1 {

			private int t2;

			public void test() {
				System.out.println(t);
				System.out.println(super.t1);
				System.out.println(this.t2);
			}
		}

		class T3 extends T2 {

			public void test() {
				System.out.println(t);
				System.out.println(super.t1); // NG: t1 Compile error! Why?
				System.out.println(super.t2); // OK: t2 OK
			}
		}
	}


Why can nested child classes access private members of their parent class, but grandchildren cannot?

I know that I can make a setter that checks to see if a value is NULL and do something. Example:

    &lt;TextBlock&gt;
      &lt;TextBlock.Style&gt;
        &lt;Style&gt;
          &lt;Style.Triggers&gt;
            &lt;DataTrigger Binding=&quot;{Binding SomeField}&quot; Value=&quot;{x:Null}&quot;&gt;
              &lt;Setter Property=&quot;TextBlock.Text&quot; Value=&quot;It&#39;s NULL Baby!&quot; /&gt;
            &lt;/DataTrigger&gt;
          &lt;/Style.Triggers&gt;
        &lt;/Style&gt;
      &lt;/TextBlock.Style&gt;
    &lt;/TextBlock&gt;

But how can I check for a &quot;not&quot; value... as in &quot;NOT NULL&quot;, or &quot;NOT = 3&quot;? Is that possible in XAML?

**Results:** Thanks for your answers... I knew I could do a value converter (which means I would have to go in code, and that would not be pure XAML as I hoped for). However, that does answer the question that effectively &quot;no&quot; you can&#39;t do it in pure XAML. The answer selected, however, shows probably the best way to *create* that kind of functionality. Good find.

DataTrigger where value is NOT null?

I&#39;m using a `BooleanToVisibilityConverter` in WPF to bind the `Visibility` property of a control to a `Boolean`. This works fine, but I&#39;d like one of the controls to hide if the boolean is `true`, and show if it&#39;s `false`.

How do I invert BooleanToVisibilityConverter?

HTML5 has a new global attribute, `hidden`, which can be used to hide content.   

&lt;!-- language: lang-html --&gt;

    &lt;article hidden&gt;
       &lt;h2&gt;Article #1&lt;/h2&gt;
       &lt;p&gt;Lorem ipsum ...&lt;/p&gt;
    &lt;/article&gt;

CSS has the `display:none` rule, which can also be used to hide content. 

    article { display:none; }

Visually, they are identical.  What is the difference semantically?  Computationally?

What guidelines should I consider on when to use one or the other?

TIA.

**EDIT**:  Based on @newtron&#39;s responses (below), I did more searching.  The `hidden` attribute was hotly contested last year and (apparently) barely made it into the HTML5 spec.  Some argued it was redundant and had no purpose.  From what I can tell, the final evaluation is this:  If I&#39;m targeting only web browsers, there is no difference.  (One page even asserted that web browsers used `display:none` to implement the hidden attribute.)  But if I&#39;m considering accessibility (e.g., perhaps I expect my content to be read by screen-readers), then there is a difference.  The CSS rule `display:none` might hide my content from web browsers, but a corresponding aria rule (e.g., `aria-hidden=&quot;false&quot;`) might try to read it.  Thus, I now agree that @newtron&#39;s answer is correct, though perhaps (arguably) not as clear as I might like.  Thanks @newtron for your help.

What is the difference between the hidden attribute (HTML5) and the display:none rule (CSS)?

I looked at the [manual][1], but I can&#39;t seem to find the answer.

What is the default visibility in PHP for methods without a visibility declaration? Does PHP have a package visibility like in Java?  

For example, in the following code, is `go()` public or private?

    class test {
      function go() {
      }
    }

The reason I asked is that I&#39;ve seen many constructors code written as `function __construct()` and some as `public function __construct()`. Are they equivalent?


  [1]: http://php.net/manual/en/language.oop5.visibility.php

Default visibility of class methods in PHP

Can you do something like

```js
function showDiv()
{
    [DIV].visible = true;
    //or something
}
```

How to make a DIV visible and invisible with JavaScript?

In JavaScript, how would you check if an element is actually visible?

I don&#39;t just mean checking the `visibility` and `display` attributes. I mean, checking that the element is not

- `visibility: hidden` or `display: none`
- underneath another element
- scrolled off the edge of the screen

For technical reasons I can&#39;t include any scripts. I can however use [Prototype][1] as it is on the page already.


  [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype_JavaScript_Framework

How do I check if an element is really visible with JavaScript?

I tend to have a lot of these in my code

    if(shouldElementBeVisible)
        $element.show()
    else
        $element.hide()

Is there any more elegant way packaged with javascript, jquery, or underscore? Ideally I want something that looks like this

    $element.showOrHideDependingOn(shouldElementBeVisible)

Hide/show element with a boolean

Animate visibility modes, GONE and VISIBLE

I need to do a very simple thing - find out if the software keyboard is shown. Is this possible in Android?

How to check visibility of software keyboard in Android?

is it possible to determine whether my `UIView` is visible to the user or not?

My View is added as `subview` several times into a `Tab Bar Controller`.

Each instance of this view has a `NSTimer` that updates the view.

However I don&#39;t want to update a view which is not visible to the user.

Is this possible?

Thanks

Determine if UIView is visible to the user?

How can I hide a column in a WPF `DataGrid` through a Binding?

This is what I did:

    &lt;DataGridTextColumn Header=&quot;Column header&quot;
                        Binding=&quot;{Binding ColumnValue}&quot;
                        Width=&quot;100&quot;
                        ElementStyle=&quot;{StaticResource DataGridRightAlign}&quot;
                        Visibility=&quot;{Binding MyColumnVisibility}&quot; /&gt;

And this is what I got (besides the column still visible):

&gt; System.Windows.Data Error: 2 : Cannot find governing FrameworkElement or FrameworkContentElement for target element. BindingExpression:Path=MyColumnVisibility; DataItem=null; target element is &#39;DataGridTextColumn&#39; (HashCode=1460142); target property is &#39;Visibility&#39; (type &#39;Visibility&#39;)

How to fix the binding?

Binding Visibility for DataGridColumn in WPF

In Java, we have the package protected (default) modifier for classes, which allows us to have many classes in a single package but exposes only a few and keeps the logic encapsulated.

With Kotlin this doesn&#39;t seem to be the case. If I want a few classes to be visible to each other but no further, I have to use a private modifier which limits visibility to a single file. 

So if you want 10 classes in a package but only one of them to be public, you&#39;d have to have one huge file with all the classes in it (and `private` all over the place).

Is this normal practice or there is a way to achieve some similar modularity in Kotlin?

I don&#39;t understand: if they have the notion of a package, why did they get rid of package protected access?

**Update: We might have package protected visibility after all**       
[see the discussion here][1]


  [1]: https://discuss.kotlinlang.org/t/kotlin-to-support-package-protected-visibility/1544

**Update: If you read through the discussion and still think this is a must-have feature for the language, please vote [here](https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-29227)** 

Package protected alternative in Kotlin

In Java it&#39;s possible to hide a class&#39; main constructor by making it `private` and then accessing it via a `public` `static` method inside that class:

    public final class Foo {
    	/* Public static method */
    	public static final Foo constructorA() {
    		// do stuff
    		
    		return new Foo(someData);
    	}
    	
    	private final Data someData;
    	
    	/* Main constructor */
    	private Foo(final Data someData) {
    		Objects.requireNonNull(someData);
    		
    		this.someData = someData;
    	}
    	
    	// ...
    }

How can the same be reached with Kotlin without separating the class into a `public` interface and a `private` implementation? Making a constructor `private` leads to it not being accessible from outside the class, not even from the same file.

Private constructor in Kotlin

I was reading about the difference between two CSS properties `display:none` and `visibility:hidden` and encountered the **DOM reflow** term.

The statement was
&gt; `display: none` causes a DOM reflow whereas `visibility: hidden` does not. 

So my question is: 
### What is DOM reflow and how does it work?

What is DOM reflow?

Method visibility in Ruby (public, protected, and private methods) has been well explained in places like [this blog post](http://weblog.jamisbuck.org/2007/2/23/method-visibility-in-ruby). But in Ruby on Rails it seems slightly different than it would be in a regular Ruby application because of the way the framework is set up. So, in Rails models, controllers, helpers, tests, etc., when is/isn&#39;t it appropriate to use protected or private methods?

**Edit**: Thanks for the answers so far. I understand the concept of protected and private in Ruby, but I&#39;m looking more for an explanation of the typical way those types of visibility are used within the context of the various pieces of a Rails app (models, controllers, helpers, tests). For example, public controller methods are action methods, protected methods in the application controller are used for &quot;helper methods&quot; that need to be accessed by multiple controllers, etc.

Protected and private methods in Rails

This is confusing me:

As far as I have read, a view with setVisibility(View.GONE); should not receive any more touch- or click events.
My layout has two parts, which will be visible or gone so that only one of them is visible and usable at a time but View.GONE doesn&#39;t do the trick.
I can&#39;t see the GONE view, as expected, but it still reacts to onClick (and consumes the event the other view should get).

Can you help me?

_Maybe of interest:
When I start my project one view is GONE, the other visible. This time it will work as expected (the GONE view is basically ignored), but after setting View.GONE through the code it&#39;ll stop working._

android View with View.GONE still receives onTouch and onClick

I&#39;m developing an app for iOS and I&#39;m using the Storyboard with AutoLayout ON. One of my view controllers has a set of 4 buttons, and in certain circumstances i would like to make the first one disappear.

If I use the `setHidden:TRUE` method the UIButton become invisible but it still obviously take space in the view, and the result is an &quot;hole&quot; which I&#39;ve not been able to fill making the remaining UIButton to float towards the top of the main view.

In Android I would have simply used `View.GONE` instead of `View.INVISIBLE`, but in iOS I&#39;m stuck with this behaviour and I don&#39;t want to believe that the only solution is to manually (yes I mean programmatically) move the remaining elements to the top.

I thought I would have been able to do it setting some sort of Constraint to make everything as automatic as it is in Android but I&#39;ve had no luck. 

Before I turn Autolayout OFF, can someone point me to the right direction?

I&#39;m using the IB, but I&#39;m comfortable with programmatic stuff as well.

**UPDATE:**

Setting the component height to 0 doesn&#39;t help as well.

I tried something like this:

    UIButton *b;
    CGRect frameRect = b.frame;
    frameRect.size.height = 0;
    b.frame = frameRect;


iOS equivalent for Android View.GONE visibility mode

On more than one occasion I have found myself desiring a variable visibility that is not possible in Java.  I wanted certain members to be visible within their own class and within any sub-classes, but not to the rest of the package or to the rest of the world.  In other words, I wanted this:


    Modifier        Class     Package   Subclass  World
    sub-class       Y         N         Y         N

However, the designers of Java only gave me [this][1]:


    Modifier        Class     Package   Subclass  World
    public          Y         Y         Y         Y
    protected       Y         Y         Y         N
    no modifier     Y         Y         N         N
    private         Y         N         N         N

The typical case when I want something like this is when creating an abstract class.  Sometimes I find the abstract parent needs access to certain members, but concrete children do as well.  I can give them this access by making the members `protected`, but that opens up accessibility to the rest of the package when I don&#39;t really want to.

To be fully clear, I know such a modifier is _not_ possible in Java.  My question is why is such a modifier not included in Java?  It seems (to me) to be a more natural visibility level than either `protected` or the default.  Is the reason just along the lines of it not being sufficiently important to be included, or is it more related to possible side effects that I haven&#39;t considered?


  [1]: http://download.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/javaOO/accesscontrol.html

Why is there no sub-class visibility modifier in Java?

If the `visibility` property of the style of an HTML element is set to `hidden`, is it still clickable?

When the `display` property is set to `none`, the element is not even part of the DOM tree, so that is not a problem. But I was wondering if a `hidden` element still responds to mouse events. 

CSS: Is a hidden object clickable?

I have a bunch of thumbnails which I am loading with a style of `visibility: hidden;` so that they all maintain their correct layouts. Once the page is fully loaded I have a jquery function that fades them in. This worked when their style was set to `display: none;` but obviously the layout screwed up then. Any suggestions?

Heres the fade line:

    $(&#39;.littleme&#39;).fadeIn(&#39;slow&#39;);

jquery fade element does not show elements styled &#39;visibility: hidden&#39;

In jQuery, there are `.hide()` and `.show()` methods which sets the CSS `display: none` setting. 

Is there an equivalent function which would set the `visibility: hidden` setting? 

I know I can use `.css()` but I prefer some function like `.hide()` or so. Thanks.

Equivalent of jQuery .hide() to set visibility: hidden

`display:none` means that the element isn&#39;t rendered as part of the DOM, so it&#39;s not loaded until the display property changes to something else. 

`visibility:hidden` loads the element, but does not show it. 

Why does jQuery use `display:none` for its show/hide functions instead of switching between `visibility:hidden` and `visibility:visible`?

Why does jQuery show/hide use display:none instead of visibility:hidden?

I have a view, lets say 100x100. And it has set of uiviews as subviews: let say 30x30

If a subview has top-left coordinate: (90,90) - I expect to see only part of this subview. But I still see entire area - even if it is out of parents bounds

The question is how to make uiview to show only those parts of subview, which are in original bounds?

thank you

UIView hide children views when out of bounds

Why doesn&#39;t the textView become invisible?

Here is my layout xml:

    &lt;?xml version=&quot;1.0&quot; encoding=&quot;utf-8&quot;?&gt;
    &lt;LinearLayout xmlns:android=&quot;http://schemas.android.com/apk/res/android&quot;
        android:layout_width=&quot;match_parent&quot;
        android:layout_height=&quot;match_parent&quot;
        android:orientation=&quot;vertical&quot; &gt;
	
        &lt;TextView
	    android:id=&quot;@+id/tvRotate&quot;
	    android:layout_width=&quot;wrap_content&quot;
	    android:layout_height=&quot;wrap_content&quot;
	    android:text=&quot;Rotate Me&quot;
	/&gt;
    &lt;/LinearLayout&gt;

..and here is my activity:

	public class RotateMeActivity extends Activity
	{
		@Override
		public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) 
		{
			super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
			setContentView(R.layout.main);
			TextView tvRotate = (TextView) findViewById(R.id.tvRotate);
			
			RotateAnimation r = new RotateAnimation(0, 180, Animation.RELATIVE_TO_SELF, 0.5f, Animation.RELATIVE_TO_SELF, 0.5f);
			r.setDuration(0);
			r.setFillAfter(true);
			tvRotate.startAnimation(r);
			tvRotate.setVisibility(View.INVISIBLE);
		}
	}
	
My goal is to rotate a view and then be able to hide and show it in code by setting setVisibility. The following works, but setRotation is available only in API Level 11. I need a way to do it in API Level 10.

    tvRotate.setRotation(180);//instead of the RotateAnimation, only works in API Level 11
    tvRotate.setVisibility(View.INVISIBLE);
        




Why doesn&#39;t setVisibility work after a view is animated?

I&#39;m displaying a very big tree with a lot of items in it. Each of these items shows information to the user through its associated UserControl control, and this information has to be updated every 250 milliseconds, which can be a very expensive task since I&#39;m also using reflection to access to some of their values. My first approach was to use the IsVisible property, but it doesn&#39;t work as I expected.

Is there any way I could determine whether a control is &#39;visible&#39; to the user? 

Note: I&#39;m already using the IsExpanded property to skip updating collapsed nodes, but some nodes have 100+ elements and can&#39;t find a way to skip those which are outside the grid viewport.

In WPF, how can I determine whether a control is visible to the user?

I am trying to perform a backup/restore function for static properties of classes. I can get a list of all of the static properties and their values using the reflection objects `getStaticProperties()` method. This gets both `private` and `public static` properties and their values.

The problem is I do not seem to get the same result when trying to restore the properties with the reflection objects `setStaticPropertyValue($key, $value)` method. `private` and `protected` variables are not visible to this method as they are to `getStaticProperties()`. Seems inconsistent.

Is there any way to set a private/protected static property using reflection classes, or any other way for that matter?

**TRIED**

	class Foo {
		static public $test1 = 1;
		static protected $test2 = 2;
		
		public function test () {
			echo self::$test1 . &#39;&lt;br&gt;&#39;;
			echo self::$test2 . &#39;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&#39;;
		}
		
		public function change () {
			self::$test1 = 3;
			self::$test2 = 4;
		}
	}

	$test = new foo();
	$test-&gt;test();
	
	// Backup
	$test2 = new ReflectionObject($test);
	$backup = $test2-&gt;getStaticProperties();
	
	$test-&gt;change();
	
	// Restore
	foreach ($backup as $key =&gt; $value) {
		$property = $test2-&gt;getProperty($key);
		$property-&gt;setAccessible(true);
		$test2-&gt;setStaticPropertyValue($key, $value);
	}
	
	$test-&gt;test();

Is there any way to set a private/protected static property using reflection classes?

There is the way to change visibility of View, but how can I change programmatically visibility of layout defined in XML? How to get layout object?

    &lt;LinearLayout
        android:id=&quot;@+id/contacts_type&quot;
        android:orientation=&quot;horizontal&quot;
        android:layout_width=&quot;fill_parent&quot;
        android:layout_height=&quot;wrap_content&quot;
        android:visibility=&quot;gone&quot;&gt;
    &lt;/LinearLayout&gt;


How to change visibility of layout programmatically

I developed cross platform software in c++. As I know, Linux .so exported all the symbols by default, well through `&quot;gcc -fvisibility=hidden&quot;` I can set all the exported symbols as hidden, then set `__attribute__(visibility(&quot;default&quot;))` for the class and function I want to export, so I can control what I want to export.

My question is, using CMake, how can I do the work as &quot;gcc -fvisibility=hidden&quot; control?

All Visibility Solutions on Gang of Coders

Total of 36 Visibility Solutions