When I write this:
property bool token: false
Settings {
property alias token: root.token
}
and then change token somewhere in application to true, next time when I run the application token is true.
But when I write this:
property var token: null
Settings {
property alias token: root.token
}
and change token to {'a': 'b'} for example, next time I run the application token is null like Settings doesn't save JS Object. Any idea what's wrong here?
Update:
It seems that problem is not with saving the js object {'a': 'b'}, QML saves it successfully, the problem is with null if I change it to false everything works alright. I guess it's related to this question Storing data using Settings element in QML but I don't understand why null is being post processed, though using false instead of null as default value for this property solves the problem I don't like it as I don't want false here, it's not appropriate morally, I want null.
Update 2:
I found my solution, setting no default value for property (not false nor null) seems to solve the issue and it seems appropriate morally like this:
property var token
Settings {
property alias token: root.token
}
I don't understand why null doesn't work yet. Any explanation would be welcome.
Setting no default value for property (not false nor null) seems to solve the issue:
property var token
Settings {
property alias token: root.token
}
Related
I'm trying out the Cosmos DB SDK's new Patch/Partial Update-functionality (for .NET)
When adding a new property I use
var patchOperations = new List<PatchOperation>(){
PatchOperation.Add<string>("/FavoriteColor", **null**)
};
await container.PatchItemAsync<T>(
id: myId,
partitionKey: new PartitionKey(myPk),
patchOperations: patchOperations);
The problem is, that it throws at the PatchOperation-Add() if I set second parameter to null (with message "Value cannot be null"). I can set any non-null string and it works well. I just wonder if this isn't supported yet or if I missed something.
Thanks to github user rvdvelden (source), this work around appears to work perfectly:
private JToken NullValue { get { return new JProperty("nullValue", null).Value; } }
Used in this way:
operations.Add(PatchOperation.Set("\customer", value ?? NullValue));
Remove is one alternative if the intent is to remove field/property.
This is not supported with Patch yet,
However, if you want to remove the entire property you need to use Remove Operation
I'm trying to make use of the SfDataGrid component in my UWP app and have everything working just fine in debug mode. When I switched over to release mode to regression test the app before publishing to the Windows store the app throws an exception during grid serialization.
I have an SfDataGrid defined with 4 text columns, 1 numeric column and 1 template column. The template column just includes a delete button so that the user to can remove the row.
I have a method to return the serialization options as follows:
private SerializationOptions GetGridSerializationOptions()
{
return new SerializationOptions
{
SerializeFiltering = false,
SerializeColumns = true,
SerializeGrouping = true,
SerializeSorting = true,
SerializeTableSummaries = true,
SerializeCaptionSummary = true,
SerializeGroupSummaries = true,
SerializeStackedHeaders = true
};
}
Then I have another method to serialize the grid settings as follows:
private void RetrieveDefaultGridSettings()
{
using (MemoryStream ms = new MemoryStream())
{
gridReport.Serialize(ms, GetGridSerializationOptions());
_defaultGridSettings = Convert.ToBase64String(ms.ToArray());
}
}
I've followed the SyncFusion documentation (https://help.syncfusion.com/uwp/datagrid/serialization-and-deserialization) which describes how to serialize template columns. I have everything working perfectly in debug mode, but when I switch to release mode I get an exception on this line:
gridReport.Serialize(ms, GetGridSerializationOptions());
The exception is:
System.Runtime.Serialization.InvalidDataContractException: 'KnownTypeAttribute attribute on type 'Syncfusion.UI.Xaml.Grid.SerializableGridColumn' specifies a method named 'KnownTypes' to provide known types. Static method 'KnownTypes()' was not found on this type. Ensure that the method exists and is marked as static.'
I've had a look at the SerializableGridColumn class and can see a public static method called KnownTypes so I don't really understand why this exception is happening. I'm even more confused about why it's only happening in release mode.
In attempt to fix the problem I have tried referencing the entire SDK, removing the SDK and referencing the specific assemblies (Syncfusion.SfGrid.UWP, Syncfusion.Data.UWP, Syncfusion.SfInput.UWP, Syncfusion.SfShared.UWP, Syncfusion.SfGridConverter.UWP, Syncfusion.XlsIO.UWP and Syncfusion.Pdf.UWP) but neither yields a different result and the exception still occurs, but only in release mode.
Switching off the setting "Compile with .NET Native tool chain" does resolve the problem, but is not a practical solution as this blocks me from publishing the app to the Windows store.
Thanks very much for any assistance anyone can provide.
After exhausting all possible problems with my own code, I logged with an issue with SyncFusion. They're investigating and will hopefully provide a fix soon.
Custom boolean attributes do not bind like built in. checked.bind='1===2' will not include the checked attribute in the tag. myboolatt.bind='1===2' WILL include the myboolatt in the tag. I did myboolatt.bind='1===2 | boolconverter' to log out the value and it says false.
So what am I doing wrong? It seems Aurelia is inconsistent on binding expressions. Another instance is I can do this title=${$index<12} inside a repeat and I get what is expected. So I thought this would work - myboolatt.bind=${$index<12}. That doesn't even compile.
Believe me I have read the all the doc (doesn't mean I didn't miss something) and many posts including the long running discussions between the Aurelia team concerning boolean attributes.
I have wrapped expressions in "" and in ${} and in both but just can't get it to work.
It feels like I am missing 1 vital piece of information that will magically explain these inconsistencies and slay my frustration. One of the reasons I like Aurelia so much (on top of convention based) is that I have actually just guessed at a few things - thinking this is how I would do it - and ding-dang if they didn't just work.
I really feel like this should just work. So again I ask - what am I doing wrong?
Thanks
If you are using .bind, you bind it to the att variable in your js/ts file, and you should not use any dollar signs or brackets.
For example, myboolatt.bind=${$index<12} should be myboolatt.bind="$index<12". The use of the dollar sign in index has nothing to do with the bindings. This is just a variable provided by Aurelia.
When you want to use variables without bind you use ${variable}.
The checked attribute not being present, I in the tag I'm guessing is because it's evaluated to false, and the checked attribute is not a true/false attribute. A input that's checked will look like <input type="checkbox" checked/>
It was not Aurelia binding. I initially created bool attributes but did not have a need to bind. They were just empty classes. Then I needed binding so I added the necessary methods. What ended up causing the confusion was using myboolatt sends no argument into valueChanged where myboolatt.bind sends T or F. Not being a regular js'er this threw me a bit and I see there are a number of ways to handle. Anyway here are the attributes and usage. Hope it helps someone else.
Thanks
function private_ValueChanged(self, att, value) {
if (value === false) self.element.removeAttribute(att);
else self.element.setAttribute(att, '');
}
export class toggleCustomAttribute {
static inject = [Element];
constructor(element) { this.element = element; }
valueChanged(newValue, oldValue) { private_ValueChanged(this, 'toggle', newValue);
}
export class radioCustomAttribute {
static inject = [Element];
constructor(element) { this.element = element; }
valueChanged(newValue, oldValue) { private_ValueChanged(this, 'radio', newValue); }
}
<ff-button repeat.for="keymen of keyChangeMenu" radio.bind="$index<12" class='ff-button' click.delegate="keyChangeClick($event.target)" id.bind="$index+'_key'" >
${keymen[0]}<sup>${keymen[1]}</sup>
</ff-button>
I read here that is possible to access a prop of a Record object using dot-notation like person.Name X person.get('name'). However it isn't working to me if I try to access it using the property directly.
My code:
new Record({
id: 123,
description: 'Foo',
imgSrc: 'https://foo.co'
}))
If I try to access the property description directly like person.description it doesn't work. I should use person.get('description') rather access it directly.
What I'm doing wrong since it should let me access the property directly?
You're a using a Map, but property access using dot notation is only available on Immutable.Record. Here's the relevant section on the site: https://facebook.github.io/immutable-js/docs/#/Record
//first make a template
var MyThingie = Record({id:123, description:'Foo', imgSrc: 'https://foo.co'});
//now create records
var myRecord = new MyThingie({description:'Not the default description'});
//outputs 'Not the default description'
console.log(myRecord.description);
Meteors loginWithPassword() function doesn't provide me the object systemData, which I adding to user doc (not to profile obj) during registration. The thing is, that if I look into console after logging in, I can see that object systemData (that means probably it's not publish issue), but not in callback of loginWithPassword() function, where I need them (to dynamically redirect user to proper page). Is there way to get this object, without any ugly things like timers?
Meteor.loginWithPassword(email, password, function(errorObject) {
if (errorObject) {
...
} else {
// returns true
if (Meteor.userId()) {
// returns false
if (Meteor.user().systemData) {
...
}
// user doc without systemData object
console.log(JSON.stringify(Meteor.user());
}
}
I've adding object systemData on creating user:
Accounts.onCreateUser(function(options, user) {
if (options.profile) {
user.profile = options.profile;
}
...
user.systemData = systemDataRegularUser;
return user;
});
Are you sure publish data to Client ?
I get User Info Using loginWithPassword in callback function.
Meteor.loginWithPassword username,password,(error,result1)->
options =
username: username
password: password
email: result['data']['email']
profile:
name: result['data']['display-name']
roles: result.roles
console.log Meteor.user(), result1
I Create user flowing code: (options contains systemData)
Accounts.createUser option
The first problem is that you want a custom field on a user document published to the client. This is a common question - see the answer here.
The next problem is that even after you add something like:
Meteor.publish("userData", function () {
return Meteor.users.find(this.userId, {fields: {systemData: 1}});
});
I think you still have a race condition. When you call loginWithPassword, the server will publish your user document, but it will also publish another version of the same document with the systemData field. You are hoping that both events have completed by the time Meteor.user() is called. In practice this may just work, but I'm not sure there is any guarantee that it always will. As you suggested, if you added a slight delay with a timer that would probably work but it's an ugly hack.
Alternatively, can you just add systemData to the user's profile so it will always be published?
I didn't find exact way how to solve this, but found easy workaround.
To make some action right after user logged in (eg. dynamically redirect user to proper page), you can hook on your home page with Iron router.(If you using it.) :
this.route('UsersListingHome', {
path: '/',
template: 'UsersListing',
data: function() { ... },
before: function() {
if (isCurrentUserAdmin() && Session.get('adminJustLogged') !== 'loggedIn') {
Router.go('/page-to-redirect');
Session.set('adminJustLogged','loggedIn');
}
}
});
After click on logout of course if (isCurrentUserAdmin()) { Session.set('adminJustLogged', null); }
I've further thought about calling Meteor.call('someMethod') to fetch userData object in Method callback, but now I'm satisfied.
PS: I know that it's not recommended to have plenty session variables or other reactive data source for speeding-up my app, but I believe, that one is not tragedy :)
PS2: Anyway, thanks for your answers.