I have two viewmodels, one is created with validation.group and the other as validatedObservabel. The method errors.showAllMessages() fails for the second view model. Why?
function VM1 {
this.errors = ko.validation.group(this);
email:ko.observable().extend({required:true})
}
var vm1 = new VM1();
if (!vm1.isValid()) {
vm1.errors.showAllMessages(); //works fine
}
function VM2 {
this.errors = ko.validatedObservable(this);
email:ko.observable().extend({required:true})
}
var vm2 = new VM2();
if (!vm2.isValid()) {
vm2.errors.showAllMessages(); //fails
}
A validatedObservable is a wrapper on validation.group, which offers a few more features and functionality. It achieves this by internally creating a validation.group. In order to access validation.group methods (such as showAllMessages) you need to explicitly access the internal validation.group object via the 'errors' property on the validatedObservable.
i.e.
function VM2 {
this.errors = ko.validatedObservable(this);
email:ko.observable().extend({required:true})
}
var vm2 = new VM2();
if (!vm2.isValid()) {
vm2.errors.showAllMessages(); //fails
vm2.errors.errors.showAllMessages(); // Works!
}
Clearly it looks a bit weird to have errors.errors, but that is just because you named the validatedObservable 'errors'. The syntax looks nicer if you call it something like 'validationModel'
e.g.
function VM2 {
this.validationModel= ko.validatedObservable(this);
email:ko.observable().extend({required:true})
}
var vm2 = new VM2();
if (!vm2.isValid()) {
vm2.validationModel.errors.showAllMessages(); // Works!
}
Related
I know basic Javascript, but am confronted with a problem in a Typescript file. I'm using Ionic framework to test a page where a user can theoretically "swipe" like they're on Tinder, just for fun.
I have all the JS written, because I'm moving this over from Codepen, but I can't seem to get past Typescript's syntax.
The Javascript:
var tinderContainer = document.querySelector('.tinder');
var allCards = document.querySelectorAll('.tinder--card');
var nope = document.getElementById('nope');
var love = document.getElementById('love');
function initCards(card, index) {
var newCards = document.querySelectorAll('.tinder--card:not(.removed)');
newCards.forEach(function (card, index) {
card.style.zIndex = allCards.length - index;
}
}
The Typescript (that I put together using Google and SOF answers):
export class TestPage {
constructor(public navCtrl: NavController) {
}
tinderContainer = document.querySelector('ion-content');
allCards = document.querySelector('.tinder--card');
nope = document.getElementById('nope');
love = document.getElementById('love');
declare initCards(card,index) {
newCards = document.querySelectorAll('.tinder--card:not(.removed)');
newCards.forEach((card,index)) {
card.style.zIndex = allCards.length - index;
}
}
}
some hints are:
Use let newCards in you function as you have to declare your variable.
Your forEach should be something like this.
newCards.forEach((card, index) => {
...
});
but in order to use syntax like card.style.zIndex and allCards.length you will have to declare variable types..
For unknown models you can use something like card['style']['zIndex']
Also you have to use this to access class properties, like this.allCards
Perhaps this is the wrong approach to my problem, but that is why I'm here. In the code below is a sample of a JavaScript module pattern with sub-modules. As I build this, I realize that some sub-modules need to "call" each other's methods.
I know that it would be wrong to use the full call admin.subModuleB.publicB_2(); but its the only way since the IIFE functions cannot call "themselves" until instatiated, ex. "module" is not available in the primary namespace, etc...
My thought is that this pattern is incorrect for my situation. The purpose of the module encapsulation is to keep things private unless reveled. So what would be a better pattern?
var module = (function($, window, document, undefined) {
return {
subModuleA : (function() {
var privateA = 100;
return {
// We have access to privateA
publicA_1 : function() {
console.log(privateA);
// How do I use a method from publicB_1
// the only way is:
module.subModuleB.publicB_2();
// but I don't want to use "module"
},
publicA_2 : function() {
console.log(privateA);
}
}
})(),
subModuleB : (function() {
var privateB = 250;
return {
// We have access to privateB
publicB_1 : function() {
console.log(privateB);
},
publicB_2 : function() {
console.log(privateB);
// I have access to publicB_1
this.publicB_1();
}
}
})()
}
})(jQuery, window, document);
What you actually have is an issue with dependencies. Sub module A has a dependency on Sub module B. There are two solutions that come to mind.
Define both modules as their own variables inside the function closure, but return them together in a single object.
What you actually want is instantiable classes where Class A has a dependency on Class B.
Since solution #1 is the closest to your current code, let's explore that first.
Define Both Modules Separately Inside the Closure
var module = (function($, window, document, undefined) {
var SubModuleA = function() {
var privateA = 100;
return {
// We have access to privateA
publicA_1 : function() {
console.log(privateA);
// Refer to SubModuleB via the private reference inside your "namespace"
SubModuleB.publicB_2();
// but I don't want to use "module"
},
publicA_2 : function() {
console.log(privateA);
}
};
}();
var SubModuleB = function() {
var privateB = 250;
return {
// We have access to privateB
publicB_1 : function() {
console.log(privateB);
},
publicB_2 : function() {
console.log(privateB);
// I have access to publicB_1
this.publicB_1();
}
};
}();
// Return your module with two sub modules
return {
subModuleA : SubModuleA,
subModuleB : SubModuleB
};
})(jQuery, window, document);
This allows you to refer to your two sub modules using local variables to your module's closure (SubModuleA and SubModuleB). The global context can still refer to them as module.subModuleA and module.subModuleB.
If Sub Module A uses Sub Module B, it begs the question of whether or not Sub Module B needs to be revealed to the global context at all.
To be honest, this is breaking encapsulation because not all the functionality of Sub Module A exists in Sub Module A. In fact, Sub Module A cannot function correctly without Sub Module B.
Given your particular case, the Module Pattern seems to be an Anti Pattern, that is, you are using the wrong tool for the job. In reality, you have two classifications of objects that are interdependent. I would argue that you need "classes" (JavaScript Constructor functions) and traditional OOP practices.
Use JavaScript Constructor Functions ("classes")
First, let's refactor your "module" into two classes:
var module = (function($, window, document, undefined) {
function ClassA(objectB) {
var privateA = 100;
this.publicA_1 = function() {
console.log(privateA);
objectB.publicB_2();
};
this.publicA_2 = function() {
console.log(privateA);
};
}
function ClassB() {
var privateB = 250;
this.publicB_1 = function() {
console.log(privateB);
};
this.publicB_2 = function() {
console.log(privateB);
this.publicB_1();
};
}
// Return your module with two "classes"
return {
ClassA: ClassA,
ClassB: ClassB
};
})(jQuery, window, document);
Now in order to use these classes, you need some code to generate the objects from the constructor functions:
var objectA = new module.ClassA(new module.ClassB());
objectA.publicA_1();
objectA.publicA_2();
This maximizes code reuse, and because you are passing an instance of module.ClassB into the constructor of module.ClassA, you are decoupling those classes from one another. If you don't want outside code to be managing dependencies, you can always tweak ClassA thusly:
function ClassA() {
var privateA = 100,
objectB = new ClassB();
this.publicA_1 = function() {
console.log(privateA);
objectB.publicB_2();
};
this.publicA_2 = function() {
console.log(privateA);
};
}
Now you can refer to module.ClassB using the name within the function closure: ClassB. The advantage here is that outside code does not have to give module.ClassA all of its dependencies, but the disadvantage is that you still have ClassA and ClassB coupled to one another.
Again, this begs the question of whether or not the global context needs ClassB revealed to it.
I've done interception using Castle.DynamicProxy and StructureMap 2.6 API but now can't do it using StructureMap 3.0. Could anyone help me find updated documentation or even demo? Everything that I've found seems to be about old versions. e.g. StructureMap.Interceptors.TypeInterceptor interface etc.
HAHAA! I f***in did it! Here's how:
public class ServiceSingletonConvention : DefaultConventionScanner
{
public override void Process(Type type, Registry registry)
{
base.Process(type, registry);
if (type.IsInterface || !type.Name.ToLower().EndsWith("service")) return;
var pluginType = FindPluginType(type);
var delegateType = typeof(Func<,>).MakeGenericType(pluginType, pluginType);
// Create FuncInterceptor class with generic argument +
var d1 = typeof(FuncInterceptor<>);
Type[] typeArgs = { pluginType };
var interceptorType = d1.MakeGenericType(typeArgs);
// -
// Create lambda expression for passing it to the FuncInterceptor constructor +
var arg = Expression.Parameter(pluginType, "x");
var method = GetType().GetMethod("GetProxy").MakeGenericMethod(pluginType);
// Crate method calling expression
var methodCall = Expression.Call(method, arg);
// Create the lambda expression
var lambda = Expression.Lambda(delegateType, methodCall, arg);
// -
// Create instance of the FuncInterceptor
var interceptor = Activator.CreateInstance(interceptorType, lambda, "");
registry.For(pluginType).Singleton().Use(type).InterceptWith(interceptor as IInterceptor);
}
public static T GetProxy<T>(object service)
{
var proxyGeneration = new ProxyGenerator();
var result = proxyGeneration.CreateInterfaceProxyWithTarget(
typeof(T),
service,
(Castle.DynamicProxy.IInterceptor)(new MyInterceptor())
);
return (T)result;
}
}
The problem here was that SM 3.* allows interception for known types, i.e. doing something like this:
expression.For<IService>().Use<Service>().InterceptWith(new FuncInterceptor<IService>(service => GetProxyFrom(service)));
But what if you'd like to include the interception logic inside your custom scanning convention where you want to intercept all instances of type with specific signature (types having name ending on 'service', in my case)?
That's what I've accomplished using Expression API and reflection.
Also, I'm using here Castle.DinamicProxy for creating proxy objects for my services.
Hope someone else will find this helpful :)
I find the best place to go for any new versions is directly to the source.
If it's written well, then it will include test cases. Thankfully structuremap does include test cases.
You can explore the tests here
In the meantime I've written an example of an Activator Interceptor, and how to configure it.
static void Main()
{
ObjectFactory.Configure(x =>
{
x.For<Form>().Use<Form1>()
.InterceptWith(new ActivatorInterceptor<Form1>(y => Form1Interceptor(y), "Test"));
});
Application.Run(ObjectFactory.GetInstance<Form>());
}
public static void Form1Interceptor(Form f)
{
//Sets the title of the form window to "Testing"
f.Text = "Testing";
}
EDIT:
How to use a "global" filter using PoliciesExpression
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
ObjectFactory.Configure(x =>
{
x.Policies.Interceptors(new InterceptorPolicy<Form>(new FuncInterceptor<Form>(y => Intercept(y))));
});
Application.Run(ObjectFactory.GetInstance<Form>());
}
private static Form Intercept(Form form)
{
//Do the interception here
form.Text = "Testing";
return form;
}
I have a method which returns Iqueryable result, but the result is based on an if else condition, where if condition satisfies then I will use "AssetDetails" class object ,otherwise "UserandClientdetails" object.
Here is the code:
private IQueryable<?> GetAssetDetails(ShareViewModel item)
{
...
if (type == "Video")
{
if (type == "Video")
{
return from meta in my.Assets().OfType<Model.Video>()
join content in my.Contents() on meta.ContentId equals content.ID
join channel in my.Channels() on content.ChannelId equals channel.ID
where meta.ID == item.ID
select new AssetDetails
{
ContentTitle = content.Title,
ChannelName = channel.ChannelName,
...
};
}
else
{ return from meta in my.Assets().OfType<Model.Client>()
join country in db.Countries on meta.ResellerCountry equals country.ID
where meta.ID == item.ID
select new UserAndClientDetails
{
Name = meta.ResellerName,
UserName = meta.ResellerEmail,
..
};}
So how to decide type of Iqueyable here at runtime??
So, I was able to verify that this works, so I'll go ahead and post it as an answer.
You can return IQueryable instead of the generic IQueryable<>. That will accept any IQueryable<T>. However, IQueryable, since it has no direct inner type, is very limited. So, you'll still likely need to cast to IQueryable<> at some other point in your code to get anything done:
// Piece of code where you know you are working with `IQueryable<AssetDetails>`
IQueryable<AssetDetails> assetDetails = GetAssetDetails(someItem);
That's a little dangerous, though, as you're assuming that your code is working perfectly and the right type of thing is being returned. Better would be:
try
{
var assetDetails = (IQueryable<AssetDetails>)GetAssetDetails(someItem);
// do something with `assetDetails`
}
catch (InvalidCastException)
{
// recover gracefully
}
What about using a base class ?
public abstract class BaseDetails
{
// ...
}
public class AssetDetails : BaseDetails
{
// ...
}
public class UserAndClientDetails: BaseDetails
{
// ...
}
Then you method would be like :
private IQueryable<BaseDetails> GetAssetDetails(ShareViewModel item)
{
// return either IQueryable<AssetDetails> or IQueryable<UserAndClientDetails>
}
(I use typo3 4.5 with extbase-extension.)
I was map the pages_language_overlay to my extbase-model
Tx_Extension_Domain_Model_ModelName {
mapping {
tableName = pages_language_overlay
}
}
I created a model Tx_Extension_Domain_Model_ModelName with some setters and getters. after adding the repository Tx_Extension_Domain_Repository_ModelNameRepository with
public function initializeObject() {
$this->defaultQuerySettings = $this->objectManager->create('Tx_Extbase_Persistence_Typo3QuerySettings');
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectStoragePage(FALSE);
}
and inject the repository like this
public function injectModelNameRepository(Tx_Extension_Domain_Repository_ModelNameRepository $modelNameRepository) {
$this->modelNameRepository = $modelNameRepository;
}
i can not select entries with findByPid. I was testing it with findByUid and echo the pid and it works, but i get no results with findByPid.
Someone has an idea?
I only have to add
public function initializeObject() {
$this->defaultQuerySettings = $this->objectManager->create('Tx_Extbase_Persistence_Typo3QuerySettings');
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectStoragePage(FALSE);
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectSysLanguage(FALSE);
}
after this it works well. Otherwise the query has a check like
AND pages_language_overlay.sys_language_uid IN (0,-1)
in the where clause.