What about if we just want to look at what's there rather wanting to change stuff and then we want to access it by it's key rather than using dot notation?
For example:
I have object called CatalogData
I can do CatalogData.Images to get the pages.
However, say I have a function that return NSManagedObject and I want to pass #"Images" to that function.
So, eventually it'll get something like
[anNSManagedObjectThatisactuallyaCatalogData orderdSetforKey:#"Images"]
Well, we can't have that.
So why?
Should we use the good old objectForKey?
You can just use
[anNSManagedObjectThatisactuallyaCatalogData valueForKey:#"Images"]
which returns an NSOrderedSet if "Images" is an ordered to-many relationship.
Related
I need to generate Id for child object of my document. What is the current syntax for generating document key?
session.Advanced.Conventions.GenerateDocumentKey(document) is not there anymore. I've found _documentSession.Advanced.DocumentStore.Conventions.GenerateDocumentKey method but its' signature is weird: I am okay with default key generation algorithm I just want to pass an object and receive an Id.
The default implementation of GenerateDocumentKey is to get the "dynamic tag name" for the class, and append a slash. For example, class Foo would turn into Foos/ which then goes through the HiLoKeyGenerator so that ids can be assigned on the client-side without having to consult the server each time.
If you really want this behavior, you could try to use the HiLoKeyGenerator on your own, but have you considered something simpler? I don't know what your model is, but if the child thing is fully owned by the containing document (which it should be, to be in the same document) have you have several much easier options:
Just use the index within the collection
Keep a int NextChildThingId property on the document and increment that every time you add a ChildThing
Just use a Guid, although those are no fun to read, type, look at, compare, or speak to someone over the phone.
I used the CRUD generator from a legacy database. When searching for a column value I get the following error:
htmlspecialchars() expects parameter 1 to be string, array given (/usr/local/share/yii/framework/web/helpers/CHtml.php:103)
The problem is that the model has an existing column named "attributes" which is creating a conflict. I removed the entry from the _search.php and commented out all instances in the model hoping to at least get it working but no luck. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks.
Every CActiveRecord instance (or CModel instance for that matter) has a getter/setter named attributes with which all the attributes can be set. This leads to a conflict because the generated crud code uses the attributes attribute expecting it works as described before.
The controller does something like:
$model->attributes=$_POST['ModelClassName'];
// or
$model->attributes=$_GET['ModelClassName'];
This is meant to set al the (safe) attributes of the model at once. Instead this overwrites the database attribute attributes of your legacy DB model.
This in turn leads to the error you describe, because $_GET['ModelClassName'] and $_POST['ModelClassName'] typically contain arrays of data.
I guess the easiest fix would be to directly call the setter function for the "normal" attributes behavior which would lead to replacing the lines mentioned above with something like the following:
// in the controller
$model->setAttributes($_POST['ModelClassName']);
// and
$model->setAttributes($_GET['ModelClassName']);
I think rest of the generated CRUD code (the views) could and should be left untouched to make it work.
If you want to know how and why this works, it's best to do some research into the __get and __set magic functions and how they're used in the yii framework.
I am unsure how to describe what I am looking for, so hopefully the situation will make it somewhat clear.
I have an object with a number of properties (let's say object.one, object.two, object.three). There are about 30 of these properties and they all hold a string ("Pass" or "Fail").
Right now the existing code checks whether the property has value "Pass" or "Fail" and then runs some code that prints stuff out. That is, the same snippet of code is duplicated 30 times, one for each of these properties.
The code looks something like this
If (object.one = ... )
...
End if
If (object.two = ... )
...
End if
If (object.three = ... )
...
End if
I want to use a loop to clean this mess up (each block is huge), but am not sure how to do it. I was thinking perhaps there was a way such that I might be able to construct a string like "object.one" and run some function that will tell the compiler that this is actually an object's property?
That way I could create an array containing the object's name like my array = {"object.one", "object.two", "object.three"} and then do something like, in pseudocode
For each string in my array
If (some_function(string) = ...)
...
End If
Essentially, it would take those massive blocks of duplicated code and reduce it to just one block. Is there such a some_function that I am looking for?
This is in VB.net.
I'm not sure i've understand but you can use reflection and get object properties runtime ?
With reflection you can access public object properties, use PropertyFiled.GetValue() to get one, two, etc. and build an array (i suppose that one, two, etc are object Properties, true?)
Here you can find more information: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.reflection.aspx
Sorry for my bad english, i'm italian.
You seem to be describing serialization, which is the act of converting object state to a format that can be stored/transmitted and deserialization, which is the opposite.
The .NET framework has several different serializers that can work with text - either XML or JSON - the DataContractSerializer for XML and the DataContractJsonSerizlizer for JSON amongst them.
How to name a method that does getting and removal from the collection?
Say we have a collection Fruits. To get apples we would do something like apples = Fruits.Get("apples"). To remove - Fruits.Remove("apples"). If we want to do both in one method it would return apples and remove them form the collection. Something like apples = Fruits.Take("apples"). Any better ideas than "Take"?
Either remove() or take() are fine.
For example:
In java.util.Map, the remove() method gets and removes an object specified by a key.
In JavaSpaces, the take*() methods get and remove and object specified by a template.
pop(index) seems a reasonable misuse of stack's method to me.
Somewhat language specific but something like:
Object remove(int index)
I don't know much about Dojo but is the following possible:
I assume it has a getter/setter for access to its datastore, is it possible to override this code.
For example:
In the dojo store i have 'Name: #Joe'
is it possible to check the get to:
get()
if name.firstChar = '#' then just
return 'Joe'
and:
set(var)
if name.firstChar = '#' then set to #+var
Is this sort of thing possible? or will i needs a wrapper API?
You can get the best doc from http://docs.dojocampus.org/dojo/data/api/Read
First, for getting the data from a store you have to use
getValue(item, "key")
I believe you can solve the problem the following way. It assumes you are using a ItemFileReadStore, you may use another one, just replace it.
dojo.require("dojo.data.ItemFileReadStore");
dojo.declare("MyStore", dojo.data.ItemFileReadStore, {
getValue:function(item, key){
var ret = this.inherited(arguments);
return ret.charAt(0)=="#" ? ret.substr(1) : ret;
}
})
And then just use "MyStore" instead of ItemFileReadStore (or whatever store you are using).
I just hacked out the code, didn't try it, but it should very well show the solution.
Good luck
Yes, I believe so. I think what you'll want to do is read this here and determine how, if it will work:
The following statement leads me to believe the answer is yes:
...
By requiring access to go through
store functions, the store can hide
the internal structure of the item.
This allows the item to remain in a
format that is most efficient for
representing the datatype for a
particular situation. For example, the
items could be XML DOM elements and,
in that case, the store would access
the values using DOM APIs when
store.getValue() is called.
As a second example, the item might be
a simple JavaScript structure and the
store can then access the values
through normal JavaScript accessor
notation. From the end-users
perspective, the access is exactly the
same: store.getValue(item,
"attribute"). This provides a
consistent look and feel to accessing
a variety of data types. This also
provides efficiency in accessing items
by reducing item load times by
avoiding conversion to a defined
internal format that all stores would
have to use.
...
Going through store accessor function
provides the possibility of
lazy-loading in of values as well as
lazy reference resolution.
http://www.dojotoolkit.org/book/dojo-book-0-9/part-3-programmatic-dijit-and-dojo/what-dojo-data/dojo-data-design
I'd love to give you an example but I think it's going to take a lot more investigation.