So I ate some burgers and got thinking:::
here is a solution that works… but you have to chop up your running codes…:::

replace <.. with < to run..
//…………………………………..
//example1:

DISPLAY

//javascript sleep by “therealdealsince1982″; copyrighted 2009
//setInterval
var i = 0;

function run() {
//pieces of codes to run
if (i==0){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ i +” is ran”; }
if (i==1){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ i +” is ran”; }
if (i==2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ i +” is ran”; }
if (i >2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ i +” is ran”; }
if (i==5){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “all code segment finished running”; clearInterval(t); } //end interval, stops run
i++; //segment of code finished running, next…
}

t=setInterval(“run()”,1000);

//………………………………
//example2:

DISPLAY

//javascript sleep by “therealdealsince1982″; copyrighted 2009
//setTimeout
var i = 0;

function flow() {
run(i);
i++; //code segment finished running, increment i; can put elsewhere
sleep(1000);
if (i==5) {clearTimeout(t);} //stops flow, must be after sleep()
}

function run(segment) {
//pieces of codes to run, can use switch statement
if (segment==0){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment==1){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment==2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment >2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
}

function sleep(dur) {t=setTimeout(“flow()”,dur);} //starts flow control again after dur

flow(); //starts flow

//……………………………….
//example3:

DISPLAY

//javascript sleep by “therealdealsince1982″; copyrighted 2009
//setTimeout, switch
var i = 0;

function flow() {
switch(i)
{
case 0:
run(i);
sleep(1000);
break;
case 1:
run(i);
sleep(2000);
break;
case 5:
run(i);
clearTimeout(t); //stops flow
break;
default:
run(i);
sleep(3000);
break;
}
}

function run(segment) {
//pieces of codes to run, can use switch statement
if (segment==0){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment==1){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment==2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
if (segment >2){document.getElementById(“id1″).innerHTML= “code segment “+ segment +” is ran”; }
i++; //current segment of code finished running, next…
}

function sleep(dur) {t=setTimeout(“flow()”,dur);} //starts flow control again after dur

flow(); //starts flow control for first time…

the problem with sleep and setTimeout is that in a conditon where javascript calls server side code (like in most of todays world Ajax apps) we cant predict t how much time would a DB or any other server would take

window.setTimeout(“A()”, 4000);
B();

the method A() hits DB but if the reterival of data from DB takes more than 4 sec B() would be called and application can behave in unpredicted manner , so the right approach is to use code like :

A(parametersLIst,B)

and to use setTimeout very less as this method ensures proper Callback and sequence in which js methods are called

Regards
Amit

Exactly FFX stops the user interface for that while, but i just meant to show ppl. that this can be done. Of course the setTimeout is better

Thanks for dropping the comment

The problem with your approach is that it is a busy-wait. IIRC, some browsers will stall the user interface completely while the wait is executing, while others will be sluggish.

Better to wrap the second part in a function and call it with

settimeout(“secondpart();”,4000); at the end of the first part.

Regards

Ian