Doing it like:
this.$store.dispatch({
type: "getUsers",
data
}).then(() => {})
is just annoying. You have to know methods names.
I have something like:
class UserModule extends ListModule<UserState, any, api.UserListItemModel> {
actions = {
// ActionContext requires two arguments State and root state
async getAll(context: ActionContext<UserState, any>, data: Data) {}
}
}
Hot to call that actions.getUsers without that string thingy? Having typescript should have autocomplete in editor so i dont have to remember action names and to dispatch in that matter.
I mean creating some map with names maybe the answer but not sure that i want to create map with 1000 names.
I got resolved with this: https://github.com/istrib/vuex-typescript.
It says:
No string literals or constants for action/mutation/getter names No
action/mutation/getter misuse by providing wrong payload type
Intellisense giving unambiguous hints on what type of payload or getter arguments is expected
Related
we're trying to store a class instance as an atom state value. When we get the state value we'd like to copy and then mutate the object by calling methods on it. The code looks something like this:
const [config, setConfig] = useRecoilState<ConfigClass>(configAtom);
const updateConfig = () => {
const updatedConfig = _.cloneDeep(config);
updatedConfig.setProperty1('A');
updatedConfig.setProperty2('B');
setConfig(updatedConfig);
}
...
The problem here is that doing this results in TypeScript errors such as
TypeError: attempted to get private field on non-instance
It seems the config value received from the useRecoilState isn't a normal instance of the class. How can I get around this?
You cannot store a function/instance in a recoil state, all recoil states should be of type object notation (without functions), bool, number, strings and others, basically any data type serializable or able to convert to JSON.
I have a function that returns either an error message (String) or a Firestore DocumentReference. I was planning to use a class containing both and testing if the error message is non-null to detect an error and if not then the reference is valid. I thought that was far too verbose however, and then thought it may be neater to return a var. Returning a var is not allowed however. Therefore I return a dynamic and test if result is String to detect an error.
IE.
dynamic varResult = insertDoc(_sCollection,
dataRec.toJson());
if (varResult is String) {
Then after checking for compliance, I read the following from one of the gurus:
"It is bad style to explicitly mark a function as returning Dynamic (or var, or Any or whatever you choose to call it). It is very rare that you need to be aware of it (only when instantiating a generic with multiple type arguments where some are known and some are not)."
I'm quite happy using dynamic for the return value if that is appropriate, but generally I try to comply with best practice. I am also very aware of bloated software and I go to extremes to avoid it. That is why I didn't want to use a Class for the return value.
What is the best way to handle the above situation where the return type could be a String or alternatively some other object, in this case a Firestore DocumentReference (emphasis on very compact code)?
One option would be to create an abstract state class. Something like this:
abstract class DocumentInsertionState {
const DocumentInsertionState();
}
class DocumentInsertionError extends DocumentInsertionState {
final String message;
const DocumentInsertionError(this.message);
}
class DocumentInsertionSuccess<T> extends DocumentInsertionState {
final T object;
const DocumentInsertionSuccess(this.object);
}
class Test {
void doSomething() {
final state = insertDoc();
if (state is DocumentInsertionError) {
}
}
DocumentInsertionState insertDoc() {
try {
return DocumentInsertionSuccess("It worked");
} catch (e) {
return DocumentInsertionError(e.toString());
}
}
}
Full example here: https://github.com/ReactiveX/rxdart/tree/master/example/flutter/github_search
How can I pass property getter to a function that accepts function type?
Here is an example of what I want achieve:
class Test {
val test: String
get() = "lol"
fun testFun(func: ()->String) {
// invoke it here
}
fun callTest() {
testFun(test::get)
// error: Type mismatch: inferred type is
// KFunction1<#ParameterName Int, Char> but () -> String was expected
}
}
Is there a way?
You can reference the getter by writing ::test (or this::test).
When you write test::get, you are actually referencing the get method on String. That method takes an index and returns the character at that index.
If the property was a var and you want a reference to its setter, you can write ::test::set.
For more info on property references, see here: https://kotlinlang.org/docs/reference/reflection.html#bound-function-and-property-references-since-11
As already mentioned, you can use this::test to refer to the getter. Alternatively, if you have kotlin-reflect, you can do this::test.getter.
When you pass the field as a function, it assumes you mean the getter. As a result, if you want the setter, you have two options:
this::test::set
or
this::test.setter
The latter, just like this::test.getter requires kotlin-reflect, or the program will crash (tested locally with Kotlin 1.2.50)
You can, however, get the getter in another way. But I recommend you just stick with this::test because it's shorter.
You can do:
this::something::get
With just something::get it refers to the method inside the String class, which returns a char at an index. For reference, the method declaration:
public override fun get(index: Int): Char
If you don't mind, just use { test } (e.g. testFun { test }). This will exactly translate to your () -> String. The next best alternative is probably ::test (or this::test) as was already mentioned.
The second has probably only minor (negligible?) impact on performance. I did not test it myself, nor did I found any source which tells something regarding it. The reason why I say this, is how the byte code underneath looks like. Just due to this question I asked myself about the difference of the two: Is the property reference (::test) equivalent to a function accessing the property ({ test }) when passed as argument e.g. `() -> String`?
It seems that you are doing something wrong on logical level.
If you are overriding get method of a variable, then you can access it's value through this get method. Thus, why bother with test::get (which is totally different method, by the way, all you are doing is trying to access char from string), when you can just access variable by it's name?
I have routes in Akka Http(Scala) project which are basically the same (CRUD operations) except for entities they operate on
I have my Json formats defined in JsonSupport trait like this:
trait JsonSupport extends SprayJsonSupport {
import DefaultJsonProtocol._
implicit val userJsonFormat = jsonFormat3(User)
}
Then I have a route defined which extends this trait, so it works fine if I use a concrete type, but as soon as I have a generic type it fails to compile:
def userRoute[T]: Route =
pathPrefix("users") {
post {
entity(as[T]) { user =>
with error:
could not find implicit value for parameter um: akka.http.scaladsl.unmarshalling.FromRequestUnmarshaller[T]
I suspect that it can't find implicit value because the type is too broad.
What type constraints should I give the T so it would be able to resolve it?
Is there a way to solve it?
Cheers,
Leonti
I've created a simple custom element in Aurelia that uses an #inlineView() (because the view is tiny) but when I try to access one of my VM's properties from my inline view I just get "property is not defined";
import {inlineView} from 'aurelia-framework';
#inlineView(`<template><h1>${title}</h1></template>`)
export class MyCustomElement {
constructor () {
this.title = 'Hello, World!';
}
}
This happens with #bindable as well;
export class MyCustomElement {
#bindable title = 'Hello, World!';
constructor () {
}
}
When the <template><h1>${title}</h1></template> is being interpreted, the interpreter tries to interpolate the title variable which does not exist yet. Try this:
#inlineView(`<template><h1 innerHTML.bind="title"></h1></template>`)
Or even easier:
#inlineView('<template><h1>${title}</h1></template>') // without accents
The problem is you are using a template literal in your inlineView decorator which is causing Javascript to evaluate ${title} before it gets passed to the inlineView decorator function. At that point, title does not exist. You need to pass a regular string in this instance using regular quotes (' or ") around the template string like so:
#inlineView("<template><h1>${title}</h1></template>")