Cascading ajax calls with RxJs - javascript

How can I cascade RxJs calls to retrieve data from this contrived service.
First request goes to /customer/1
/customer/:id
Response:
{
Name: "Tom",
Invoices: [1,3],
Orders: [5,6]
}
In the customer response there are 2 InvoiceIds that we use to access second service:
/invoices/:id
Response
{
Id: 1,
Amount: 10
}
In the customer response there are 2 OrderIds that we use to access third service:
/orders/:id
Response
{
Id:2,
Date: '2016-11-12'
}
At the end I would like to kome up with an object looking like this:
{
Name: "Tom",
Invoices: [
{
Id: 1,
Amount: 10
},
{
Id: 3,
Amount: 5
}],
Orders: [
{
Id:5,
Date: '2016-11-12'
},
{
Id:6,
Date: '2016-11-12'
}]
}
How can I pass the ids through the pipeline so that the dependant objects are retrieved.
My gut feeling tells me I should probably use the flatMap operator, but I am totally uncertain how this could all work together.
var ajax = Rx.DOM.getJSON('/api/customers/1')
.flatMap(p => p.Invoices.map(x =>
Rx.DOM.getJSON('/api/invoices/' + x)
));

This is a typical use-case where you need to construct a response out of several HTTP calls:
const Observable = Rx.Observable;
var customerObs = Observable.create(observer => {
Observable.of({Name: "Tom", Invoices: [1,3], Orders: [5,6]})
.subscribe(response => {
var result = {
Name: response.Name,
Invoices: [],
Orders: [],
};
let invoicesObs = Observable.from(response.Invoices)
.flatMap(id => Observable.of({ Id: Math.round(Math.random() * 50), Amount: Math.round(Math.random() * 500) }).delay(500))
.toArray();
let ordersObs = Observable.from(response.Orders)
.flatMap(id => Observable.of({ Id: Math.round(Math.random() * 50), Amount: Math.round(Math.random() * 500) }).delay(400))
.toArray();
Observable.forkJoin(invoicesObs, ordersObs).subscribe(responses => {
result.Invoices = responses[0];
result.Orders = responses[1];
observer.next(result);
});
});
});
customerObs.subscribe(customer => console.log(customer));
See live demo: https://jsfiddle.net/martinsikora/uc1246cx/
I'm using Observable.of() to simulate HTTP requests, flatMap() to turn each invoice/order id into an Observable (another HTTP request) that are reemitted and then toArray() to collect all values emitted from an operator chain and reemit them in a single array (just because it's convenient).
Operator forkJoin() waits until all source Observables complete and then emits their last value as an array (so we haw array of arrays in responses).
See a similar question: Performing advanced http requests in rxjs

Related

Array of inner subscriptions with rxjs

I'm trying to improve the flattening and reduce the chaining inside my Rxjs code.
A REST call of my service getAllItems() returns the following Items[]:
[{
id: 101,
name: 'Car',
owner: 1
},
{
id: 102,
name: 'Table',
owner: 2
}]
I have another endpoint getOwnerInfo(id:number) which provides information based in the "owner" id, information which I want to combine, so the final answer should look like:
[{
id: 101,
name: 'Car',
owner: {
id: 1,
username: 'Mikelinin',
name: 'Mikel',
},
},
{
id: 102,
name: 'Table',
owner: {
id: 2,
username: 'Thominin',
name: 'Thomas',
},
}]
My current implementation .subscribes once to getAllItems call and then in the subscription body it iterates per element subscribing to getOwnerInfo.
I've been looking through other flattening examples, but basically they "break" the array, and they never put it back together. I need the output to be an array.
I've tried to use from(), concatMap(), and mergeMap() but seems I am unable to combine both requests properly.
Map your array of items into an array of observables that each emit the updated item. Then join the array of observables together.
getAllItems().pipe(
// turn item[] into observable<updatedItem>[]
map(items => items.map(item => getOwnerInfo(item.id).pipe(
map(owner => ({...item, owner}))
),
// join observable<updatedItem>[] into updatedItem[]
switchMap(itemCalls => forkJoin(itemCalls))
).subscribe(console.log);
Or you can do the mapping and joining in one step:
getAllItems().pipe(
// source item[], do stuff, emit updatedItem[]
switchMap(items => forkJoin(
items.map(item => getOwnerInfo(item.id).pipe(
map(owner => ({...item, owner}))
))
))
).subscribe(console.log);
The following will use from to convert a distinct array of owner ids into a stream of owner ids. Then it will use toArray to convert that stream back into an array and map the items array to an array of items with their respective owner object.
this.getAllItems().pipe(
switchMap(items => {
const ownerIds = Array.from(new Set(items.map(x => x.owner)));
return from(ownerIds).pipe(
concatMap(x => this.getOwnerInfo(x))
toArray(),
map(owners => items.map(x => ({ ...x, owner: owners.find(y => y.id === x.owner) })))
)
})
)

ES6 reduce function affecting array outside of scope

I've rewritten this into a simplified form to demonstrate, I have an array of pickers who have an array of time entries, I'm using reduce to summarise time entries by type on the pickers & then a second reduce to show global entries across both pickers.
The first reduce per picker works as expected.
The second reduce on global time entries works as expected but somehow changes the entries for the first picker ( Sam ).
Sam & John pick the same amount.
Apples 2h, Peaches 2h, Lemons 1h
Is there a better way to write this? Is there a concept I've failed to understand?
function testBug() {
// Reducer Function
function entryReducer(summary, entry) {
// find an index if the types of fruit are the same
let index = summary.findIndex((item) => {
return item.type.id === entry.type.id;
});
if (index === -1) {
summary.push(entry);
} else {
summary[index].hours = summary[index].hours + entry.hours;
}
return summary;
}
let pickers = [
{
id: 1,
identifier: "Sam Smith",
timeEntries: [
{
type: {
id: 1,
name: "Apples",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 2,
name: "Peaches",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 3,
name: "Lemons",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 1,
name: "Apples",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 2,
name: "Peaches",
},
hours: 1,
},
],
},
{
id: 2,
identifier: "John Snow",
timeEntries: [
{
type: {
id: 1,
name: "Apples",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 2,
name: "Peaches",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 3,
name: "Lemons",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 1,
name: "Apples",
},
hours: 1,
},
{
type: {
id: 2,
name: "Peaches",
},
hours: 1,
},
],
},
];
let pickersSummary = [];
let timeEntriesSummary = [];
for (const picker of pickers) {
if (picker.timeEntries.length > 0) {
// reduce time entries into an array of similar types
picker.timeEntries = picker.timeEntries.reduce(entryReducer, []);
// push to pickers summary arr
pickersSummary.push(picker);
// push time entries to a summary array for later reduce
picker.timeEntries.map((entry) => timeEntriesSummary.push(entry));
}
}
// Reduce time entries for all pickers
// Sam & John pick the same amount
// Apples 2h
// Peaches 2h
// Lemons 1h
// **** If I run this Sam's entries are overwritten with the global time entries ***
timeEntriesSummary = timeEntriesSummary.reduce(entryReducer, []);
const results = { pickersSummary, timeEntriesSummary };
console.log(results);
}
testBug();
module.exports = testBug;
Even though with each reducer you pass a new array [], the actual objects contained by these arrays could be shared. This means when you edit one of the objects in array "A", the objects could also change in array "B".
You know how some languages let you pass variables by value or by reference and how this fundamentally changes how values are handled? JavaScript technically uses call-by-sharing. I suggest reading this other answer: Is JavaScript a pass-by-reference or pass-by-value language?
once an element in an array is pushed into a different array it is separate in memory?
No, it isn't. In JavaScript you will always remember when you made an individual copy of an object (or at least wanted to), because that needs some effort, see What is the most efficient way to deep clone an object in JavaScript? or How do I correctly clone a JavaScript object?
So, just like when you use a=b, push(a) into an array refers the original object. See this example where there is a single object accessible via two variables (x and y), and via both elements of array z. So modifying it as z[1] affects all the others:
let x={a:5};
let y=x;
let z=[x];
z.push(y);
z[1].a=4;
console.log(x);
console.log(y);
console.log(z[0]);
console.log(z[1]);
As your objects are value-like ones and do not have anything what JSON would not support (like member functions), JSON-based cloning can work on them:
function testBug() {
// Reducer Function
function entryReducer(summary, entry) {
// find an index if the types of fruit are the same
let index = summary.findIndex((item) => {
return item.type.id === entry.type.id;
});
if (index === -1) {
//summary.push(entry);
summary.push(JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(entry))); // <--- the only change
} else {
summary[index].hours = summary[index].hours + entry.hours;
}
return summary;
}
let pickers = [
{id: 1, identifier: "Sam Smith", timeEntries: [
{type: {id: 1, name: "Apples",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 2, name: "Peaches",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 3, name: "Lemons",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 1, name: "Apples",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 2, name: "Peaches",}, hours: 1,},],},
{id: 2, identifier: "John Snow", timeEntries: [
{type: {id: 1, name: "Apples",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 2, name: "Peaches",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 3, name: "Lemons",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 1, name: "Apples",}, hours: 1,},
{type: {id: 2, name: "Peaches",}, hours: 1,},],},];
let pickersSummary = [];
let timeEntriesSummary = [];
for (const picker of pickers) {
if (picker.timeEntries.length > 0) {
// reduce time entries into an array of similar types
picker.timeEntries = picker.timeEntries.reduce(entryReducer, []);
// push to pickers summary arr
pickersSummary.push(picker);
// push time entries to a summary array for later reduce
picker.timeEntries.map((entry) => timeEntriesSummary.push(entry));
}
}
// Reduce time entries for all pickers
// Sam & John pick the same amount
// Apples 2h
// Peaches 2h
// Lemons 1h
// **** If I run this Sam's entries are overwritten with the global time entries ***
timeEntriesSummary = timeEntriesSummary.reduce(entryReducer, []);
const results = { pickersSummary, timeEntriesSummary };
console.log(results);
}
testBug();
Now it probably displays what you expected, but in the background it still alters the pickers themselves, you have that picker.timeEntries = ... line running after all. It may be worth mentioning that const something = xy; means that you can not write something = yz; later, something will stick with a given entity. But, if that entity is an object, its internals can still be changed, that happens with picker.timeEntries above (while writing picker = 123; would fail).

Generate a new array with count of property values

I have an array in my state :
projects: [
{ title: 'todo 1', person: 'Sam', status: 'ongoing'},
{ title: 'project', person: 'Jack', status: 'complete' },
{ title: 'Design video', person: 'Tim', status: 'complete' },
{ title: 'Create a forum', person: 'Jade', status: 'overdue' },
{ title: 'application', person: 'Jade', status: 'ongoing'},],
From this array (projects), I would like to generate a new array with Javascript and to get this result :
totalByPersonAndStatus : [
{person : 'Sam', complete: 0, ongoing: 1, overdue: 0 },
{person : 'Jack', complete: 1, ongoing: 0, overdue: 0 },
{person : 'Tim', complete: 1, ongoing: 0, overdue: 0 },
{person : 'Jade', complete: 0, ongoing: 1, overdue: 1 },]
I tried it
totalProjectsByPersonAndStatus: state => {
state.projects.forEach(name => {
state. totalByPersonAndStatus["name"] = name.person;
});
return state. totalByPersonAndStatus;
The problem, if a make a console.log(this.totalByPersonAndStatus) I have an object with only the data of projects.name [name: "Jade", __ob__: Observer]
Can you help me ?
Thank you
You can use reduce
let projects =[{title:'todo1',person:'Sam',status:'ongoing'},{title:'project',person:'Jack',status:'complete'},{title:'Designvideo',person:'Tim',status:'complete'},{title:'Createaforum',person:'Jade',status:'overdue'},{title:'application',person:'Jade',status:'ongoing'},]
let desired = projects.reduce((output,{person,status}) => {
if( output[person] ){
output[person][status]++
} else {
output[person] = {
person,
complete: Number(status==='complete'),
ongoing: Number(status==='ongoing'),
overdue: Number(status==='overdue')
}
}
return output;
},{})
console.log(Object.values(desired))
Create a new Set for people and statuses by iterating through the projects, a set has only unique values so sets are a convenience, iterate through your people set creating a new object with all the statuses initialized to 0, then iterate over the projects to increment the various statuses that apply. This method allows any number of new statuses to be added without changing the code - dynamic.
var people = new Set();
var status = new Set();
projects.forEach((p)=>{
people.add(p.person);
status.add(p.status);
});
var totalByPersonAndStatus = [];
people.forEach((person)=>{
let peeps = { "person": person };
status.forEach((stat)=>{
peeps[stat] = 0;
});
projects.forEach((project)=>{
if (project.person === person) { peeps[project.status]++; }
});
totalByPersonAndStatus.push(peeps);
});
You could use reduce and destructuring like this:
const projects=[{title:'todo 1',person:'Sam',status:'ongoing'},{title:'project',person:'Jack',status:'complete'},{title:'Design video',person:'Tim',status:'complete'},{title:'Create a forum',person:'Jade',status:'overdue'},{title:'application',person:'Jade',status:'ongoing'}]
const merged = projects.reduce((acc,{person,status})=>{
acc[person] = acc[person] || { person, ongoing:0, complete:0, overdue:0}
acc[person][status]++;
return acc;
},{})
console.log(Object.values(merged))
The goal is create an object merged with each person as key and then increment based on the statuses:
{
"Sam": {
"person": "Sam",
"ongoing": 1,
"complete": 0,
"overdue": 0
},
"Jack": {
}
...
}
Then use Object.values, to get the final array.
You could make it a one-liner:
const projects=[{title:'todo 1',person:'Sam',status:'ongoing'},{title:'project',person:'Jack',status:'complete'},{title:'Design video',person:'Tim',status:'complete'},{title:'Create a forum',person:'Jade',status:'overdue'},{title:'application',person:'Jade',status:'ongoing'}],
output = Object.values(projects.reduce((a,{person,status})=>
((a[person] = a[person] || {person,ongoing:0,complete:0,overdue:0})[status]++,a),{}))
console.log(output)

array of object manipulation in javascript

I have an empty array inside the object like this,
const account = {
name: "David Reallycool",
expenses: []
}
and I need to create a function to add expense into an empty array, the result I need is,
const account = {
name: "David Reallycool",
expenses: [
{
descrition: "Rent",
amount: 1000
},
{
description: "Coffee",
amount: 2.50
}
]
How can I manipulate it?
const addExpense = (expense) => {
account.expenses.push(expense)
}
// use like this
addExpense({ description: 'Rent', amount: 1000 })
addExpense({ description: 'Coffee', amount: 2.5 })
const account = {
name: "David Reallycool",
expenses: []
}
function addExpense(description, amount){
account.expenses.push({"description": description, "amount":amount});
}
addExpense("Test", 500);
console.log(account);
You need to know two things for that:
Changing value in array reflects the change in the original array if you are passing the array as a function parameter as it is passed by reference.
You need to use push() function of Array prototype to add that object in your expenses array.
function addExpense(expensesArray, expense){
expensesArray.push(expense);
}
const account = {
name: "David Reallycool",
expenses: []
};
var expense = {
descrition: "Rent",
amount: 1000
}
addExpense(account.expenses, expense);
var expense = {
descrition: "Coffee",
amount: 2.5
}
addExpense(account.expenses, expense);
console.log(account);
As an object (account) is transferred not as a copy you can manipulate it without problems inside your function.
function addExpenses(inputAccount){
inputAccount.expenses = [
{
descrition: "Rent",
amount: 1000
},
{
description: "Coffee",
amount: 2.50
}
]
}
// will be called with
addExpenses(account);
// here account will have expenses content

RethinkDB - Updating nested array

I have a survey table that looks like so:
{
id: Id,
date: Date,
clients: [{
client_id: Id,
contacts: [{
contact_id: Id,
score: Number,
feedback: String,
email: String
}]
}]
}
I need to updated the score and feedback fields under a specific contact. Currently, I am running the update like this:
function saveScore(obj){
var dfd = q.defer();
var survey = surveys.get(obj.survey_id);
survey
.pluck({ clients: 'contacts' })
.run()
.then(results => {
results.clients.forEach((item, outerIndex) => {
item.contacts.forEach((item, index, array) => {
if(Number(item.contact_id) === Number(obj.contact_id)) {
array[index].score = obj.score;
console.log(outerIndex, index);
}
});
});
return survey.update(results).run()
})
.then(results => dfd.resolve(results))
.catch(err => dfd.resolve(err));
return dfd.promise;
};
When I look at the update method, it specifies how to update nested key:value pairs. However, I can't find any examples to update an individual item in an array.
Is there a better and hopefully cleaner way to update items in a nested array?
You might need to get the array, filter out the desired value in the array and then append it again to the array. Then you can pass the updated array to the update method.
Example
Let's say you have a document with two clients that both have a name and a score and you want to update the score in one of them:
{
"clients": [
{
"name": "jacob" ,
"score": 200
} ,
{
"name": "jorge" ,
"score": 57
}
] ,
"id": "70589f08-284c-495a-b089-005812ec589f"
}
You can get that specific document, run the update command with an annonymous function and then pass in the new, updated array into the clients property.
r.table('jacob').get("70589f08-284c-495a-b089-005812ec589f")
.update(function (row) {
return {
// Get all the clients, expect the one we want to update
clients: row('clients').filter(function (client) {
return client('name').ne('jorge')
})
// Append a new client, with the update information
.append({ name: 'jorge', score: 57 })
};
});
I do think this is a bit cumbersome and there's probably a nicer, more elegant way of doing this, but this should solve your problem.
Database Schema
Maybe it's worth it to create a contacts table for all your contacts and then do a some sort of join on you data. Then your contacts property in your clients array would look something like:
{
id: Id,
date: Date,
clients: [{
client_id: Id,
contact_scores: {
Id: score(Number)
},
contact_feedbacks: {
Id: feedback(String)
}
}]
}
database schema
{
"clients": [
{
"name": "jacob" ,
"score": 200
} ,
{
"name": "jorge" ,
"score": 57
}
] ,
"id": "70589f08-284c-495a-b089-005812ec589f"
}
then you can do like this using map and branch query .
r.db('users').table('participants').get('70589f08-284c-495a-b089-005812ec589f')
.update({"clients": r.row('clients').map(function(elem){
return r.branch(
elem('name').eq("jacob"),
elem.merge({ "score": 100 }),
elem)})
})
it works for me
r.table(...).get(...).update({
contacts: r.row('Contacts').changeAt(0,
r.row('Contacts').nth(0).merge({feedback: "NICE"}))
})
ReQL solution
Creating a query to update a JSON array of objects in-place, is a rather complicated process in ReThinkDB (and most query languages). The best (and only) solution in ReQL that I know about, is to use a combination of update,offsetsOf,do,changeAt, and merge functions. This solution will retain the order of objects in the array, and only modify values on objects which match in the offsetsOf methods.
The following code (or something similar) can be used to update an array of objects (i.e. clients) which contain an array of objects (i.e. contracts).
Where '%_databaseName_%', '%_tableName_%', '%_documentUUID_%', %_clientValue_%, and %_contractValue_% must be provided.
r.db('%_databaseName_%').table('%_tableName_%').get('%_documentUUID_%').update(row =>
row('clients')
.offsetsOf(clients => client('client_id').eq('%_clientValue_%'))(0)
.do(clientIndex => ({
clients: row('clients')(clientIndex)
.offsetsOf(contacts => contact('contact_id').eq('%_contactValue_%')))(0)
.do(contactIndex => ({
contacts: row(clientIndex)
.changeAt(contractIndex, row(clientIndex)(contractIndex).merge({
'score': 0,
'feedback': 'xyz'
}))
})
}))
)
Why go through the trouble of forming this into ReQL?
survey
.pluck({ clients: 'contacts' }).run()
.then(results => {
results.clients.forEach((item, outerIndex) => {
item.contacts.forEach((item, index, array) => {
if(Number(item.contact_id) === Number(obj.contact_id)) {
array[index].score = obj.score;
console.log(outerIndex, index);
}
});
});
return survey.update(results).run()
})
While the code provided by Jacob (the user who asked the question here on Stack Overflow - shown above) might look simpler to write, the performance is probably not as good as the ReQL solution.
1) The ReQL solution runs on the query-server (i.e. database side) and therefore the code is optimized during the database write (higher performance). Whereas the code above, does not make full use of the query-server, and makes a read and write request pluck().run() and update().run(), and data is processed on the client-request side (i.e. NodeJs side) after the pluck() query is run (lower performance).
2) The above code requires the query-server to send back all the data to the client-request side (i.e. NodeJs side) and therefore the response payload (internet bandwidth usage / download size) can be several megabytes. Whereas the ReQL solution is processed on the query-server, and therefore the response payload typically just confirms that the write was completed, in other words only a few bytes are sent back to the client-request side. Which is done in a single request.
ReQL is too complicated
However, ReQL (and especially SQL) seem overly complicated when working with JSON, and it seems to me that JSON should be used when working with JSON.
I've also proposed that the ReThinkDB community adopt an alternative to ReQL that uses JSON instead (https://github.com/rethinkdb/rethinkdb/issues/6736).
The solution to updating nested JSON arrays should be as simple as...
r('database.table').update({
clients: [{
client_id: 0,
contacts: [{
contact_id: 0,
score: 0,
feedback: 'xyz',
}]
}]
});
tfmontague is on the right path but I think his answer can be improved a lot. Because he uses ...(0) there's a possibility for his answer to throw errors.
zabusa also provides a ReQL solution using map and branch but doesn't show the complete nested update. I will expand on this technique.
ReQL expressions are composable so we can isolate complexity and avoid repetition. This keeps the code flat and clean.
First write a simple function mapIf
const mapIf = (rexpr, test, f) =>
rexpr.map(x => r.branch(test(x), f(x), x));
Now we can write the simplified updateClientContact function
const updateClientContact = (doc, clientId, contactId, patch) =>
doc.merge
( { clients:
mapIf
( doc('clients')
, c => c('client_id').eq(clientId)
, c =>
mapIf
( c('contacts')
, c => c('contact_id').eq(contactId)
, c =>
c.merge(patch)
)
)
}
);
Use it like this
// fetch the document to update
const someDoc =
r.db(...).table(...).get(...);
// create patch for client id [1] and contact id [12]
const patch =
updateClientContact(someDoc, 1, 12, { name: 'x', feedback: 'z' });
// apply the patch
someDoc.update(patch);
Here's a concrete example you can run in reql> ...
const testDoc =
{ clients:
[ { client_id: 1
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 11, name: 'a' }
, { contact_id: 12, name: 'b' }
, { contact_id: 13, name: 'c' }
]
}
, { client_id: 2
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 21, name: 'd' }
, { contact_id: 22, name: 'e' }
, { contact_id: 23, name: 'f' }
]
}
, { client_id: 3
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 31, name: 'g' }
, { contact_id: 32, name: 'h' }
, { contact_id: 33, name: 'i' }
]
}
]
};
updateClientContact(r.expr(testDoc), 2, 23, { name: 'x', feedback: 'z' });
The result will be
{ clients:
[ { client_id: 1
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 11, name: 'a' }
, { contact_id: 12, name: 'b' }
, { contact_id: 13, name: 'c' }
]
}
, { client_id: 2
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 21, name: 'd' }
, { contact_id: 22, name: 'e' }
, { contact_id: 23, name: 'x', feedback: 'z' } // <--
]
}
, { client_id: 3
, contacts:
[ { contact_id: 31, name: 'g' }
, { contact_id: 32, name: 'h' }
, { contact_id: 33, name: 'i' }
]
}
]
}
Better late than never
I had your same problem and i could solve it with two ways:
With specific client_id
r.db('nameDB').table('nameTable').get('idRegister')
.update({'clients': r.row('clients')
.map(elem=>{
return r.branch(
elem('client_id').eq('your_specific_client_id'),
elem.merge({
contacts: elem('contacts').map(elem2=>
r.branch(
elem2('contact_id').eq('idContact'),
elem2.merge({
score: 99999,
feedback: 'yourString'
}),
elem2
)
)
}),
elem
)
})
})
Without specific client_id
r.db('nameDB').table('nameTable').get('idRegister')
.update({'clients': r.row('clients')
.map(elem=>
elem.merge({
contacts: elem('contacts').map(elem2=>
r.branch(
elem2('contact_id').eq('idContact'),
elem2.merge({
score: 99999,
feedback: 'yourString'
}),
elem2
)
)
})
)
})
I hope that it works for you, even when happened much time ago

Categories

Resources