I have a method with this signature,
void Add(Control control, Action redraw)
I need to call it like this
myClass.Add(myControl, {Some code});
Where {Some Code} to be replaced with anonymous function.
P.S. Action redraw doesnt take or return any parameters.
I have found the answer to the question using lambda expressions.
myClass.Add(myControl, () => { myControl.Visible = false; });
Related
I am looking for a way to overwrite expect method for TestController. My idea is existing tests whoever used t.expect method, I want to perform additional steps in those cases.
I came up with below sample code but testcafe runtime fails with below error
TypeError: Cannot read property '_expect$' of undefined
sample code attempting to override:
import { Selector } from "testcafe";
fixture`Getting Started`.page`http://devexpress.github.io/testcafe/example`;
test("My first test", async (t) => {
t = modify(t);
await t.typeText("#developer-name", "John Smith").click("#submit-button");
// Use the assertion to check if the actual header text is equal to the expected one
await t
.expect(Selector("#article-header").innerText)
.eql("Thank you, John Smith!");
});
function modify(t) {
let prevExpect = t.expect;
t.expect = (param) => {
console.log("modified expecte has been used");
return prevExpect(param);
};
return t;
}
Also, when using t.click(Selector(...).expect(...), It doesn't use my overwritten expect. How to make it work in the call chain as well?
Technically, it's possible to overwrite the expect method, but please note that this approach may lead to incorrect work and unexpected errors.
You need to modify your modify function as follows:
function modify (t) {
let prevExpect = t.expect;
t.expect = (param) => {
console.log("modified expect has been used");
return prevExpect.call(t, param);
};
return t;
}
As for the t.click(Selector(...).expect(...) issue, you call the expect method of Selector, but Selector does not have the expect method.
You need to add ) after Selector:
await t.click(Selector(...)).expect(...)
I have my custom Kotlin's function:
fun getActiveCartTest(isAsync: Boolean = false, vararg callback: Callback<Cart> ): TransportResponse? {
...
}
It has one default param (isAsync) and one optional (vararg) callback param.
I can call this function from java like this:
1. TransportResponse transportResponse = TransportService.INSTANCE.getActiveCartTest();
2. TransportResponse transportResponse = TransportService.INSTANCE.getActiveCartTest(false);
3. TransportResponse transportResponse = TransportService.INSTANCE.getActiveCartTest(true);
4. TransportService.INSTANCE.getActiveCartTest(true, new DefaultRestClientCallback<Cart>() {
#Override
public void onTransportResponse(#NotNull TransportResponse transportResponse) {
}
});
Nice, it works.
But, when I use this call:
TransportResponse transportResponse = TransportService.INSTANCE.getActiveCartTest(true);
I get a compile error.
What I mean. When client wants to call async call of function getActiveCartTest then it MUST use two params: isAsync AND callback.
As you can see in my function getActiveCartTest the client can omit second param (callback). It's not correct.
I need if first param isAsync = true, then user also must pass second param callback. And if first param isAsync = false then user can omit second param (callback)
Is it possible in Kotlin?
Instead of trying to make code that nobody will be able to understand, why not divide your function in getActiveCartTestSync and getActiveCartTestAsync. The thing you want might be achievable by using reflection, however you make the code much more complicated without any reason.
I use cucumber and chai-as-promised as assertion library. What is the right way to check the count value. I use equal but it works only after converting string to integer.Is there a way to assert a integer value directly?
this.Then(/^the list should contain "([^"]*)" items$/, function (arg1, callback) {
var count=parseInt(arg1);
expect(element.all(by.repeater('item in list.items')).count()).to.eventually.equal(count).and.notify(callback);
});
If you really wanted to, I believe you could bypass parseInt() by using Chai's satisfy() method and JavaScript coercion, as shown below. However, I personally prefer the method you are currently using as it is easier to understand and coercion can be tricky.
this.Then(/^the list should contain "([^"]*)" items$/, function (arg1, callback) {
expect(element.all(by.repeater('item in list.items')).count()).to.eventually.satisfy(function(count) { return count == arg1 } ).and.notify(callback);
});
I have a function that could be used in CLI or web application, that being said, there is a little difference in the process; for example: if I'm using this function for CLI it'll use a text progress bar, but that doesn't make sense if I'm using this function for a web application.
The function is basically a loop; so what i'm looking for is a way to make this function flexible by making it possible to pass code as an argument so that it'll be executed at the end of each loop cycle. So if I'm using this function in CLI; i'll pass a progress incremental function to advance the progress bar, and so on.
My current solution is to pass a progress bar object instance, which I think isn't a proper solution; because it doesn't seem flexible for the long run.
A demonstration example of what I'm already doing:
function myFunction($progressBar = null)
{
for($i = 0; $i......)
{
//Do stuff
....
//finally...
if(!empty($progressBar))
$progressBar->advance();
}
}
So, if I want to add another function at the end of the loop, I'll have to pass it as an argument and call it manually later; but as I said, it just doesn't seem right.
I'm thinking of using a callback function(an anonymous function being passed to myFunction) But what is a proper way of doing that; should I just make each callback function as an individual argument? or, to make it even more flexible, should I be grouping all callback functions in an array(if that's possible).
Yes, you can use callbacks for this.
function myFunction($progressBar = null, callable $callback = null)
{
for($i = 0; $i......)
{
//Do stuff
....
//finally...
if(!empty($progressBar))
$progressBar->advance();
}
if ($callback){ //Execute the callback if it is passed as a parameter
$callback();
}
}
Also, you can specify parameters for an anonymous function:
Example: you want to echo something at some point.
myFunction($progressBar) ; //No need yet
myFunction($progressBar, function($result){ echo $result ; }) ; //Now you want to execute it
So, handle it in an appropriate way:
if ($callback){ //Execute the callback if it is passed as a parameter
$callback("All is fine"); //Execute the callback and pass a parameter
}
Array of callbacks also may be useful in this case like:
$callbacks = array(
"onStart" => function(){ echo "started" ; },
"onEnd" => function(){ echo "ended" ; }
) ;
function myFunc($progressBar = null, $callbacks){
if (isset($callbacks["onStart"]) && is_callable($callbacks["onStart"])){
$callbacks["onStart"]() ;//Execute on start.
}
//Execute your code
if (isset($callbacks["onEnd"]) && is_callable($callbacks["onEnd"])){
$callbacks["onEnd"]() ;//Execute on end.
}
}
Newbie Rx question. I want to write a method like the following:
public IObsevable<Unit> Save(object obj)
{
var saveFunc = Observable.FromAsyncPattern(...);
saveFunc(obj).Subscribe(result =>
{
Process(result);
return Observable.Return(new Unit());
});
}
The basic idea is: Save the given object, process the results in my "inner" continuation, then allow the caller's "outer" continuation to execute. In other words, I want to chain two continuations together so that the second one does not execute until the first one finishes.
Unfortunately, the code above does not compile because the inner continuation has to return void rather than an IObservable. Plus, of course, returning an observable Unit out of a lambda is not the same as returning it from the containing function, which is what I really need to do. How can I rewrite this code so that it returns the observable Unit correctly? Thanks.
Simplest solution is to use SelectMany
public IObsevable<Unit> Save(object obj)
{
var saveFunc = Observable.FromAsyncPattern(...);
return saveFunc(obj).SelectMany(result =>
{
Process(result);
return Observable.Return(new Unit());
});
}