I need to remove trailing crlf from a string in jmeter. I have used the following function
${__javaScript('${varu_2}'.replace(/[\\r\\n]/g\,""))}
It gives me error "org.mozilla.javascript.EvaluatorException:
unterminated string literal (#1)".
Any help would be appreciated.
The inline evaluation (${varu_2}) of your variable containing multiple lines is broking the javascript evaluation.
For example the javascript would be interpreted as :
'line1
line2'.replace(/[\\r\\n]/g\,"")
The first line is an unterminated string like the error message tells us.
To avoid this behavior I would recommend using the JMeterVariables object, but since the javascript implementation (Rhino) does not seems to support well inline regexp, you should use 2 replace function instead of your regular expression:
${__javaScript(vars.get('varu_2').replace( "\r"\, "" ).replace("\n"\,""))}
Or if you prefer, with a beanshell function you can use any regular expression you :
${__BeanShell(vars.get("varu_2").replaceAll("[\r\n]"\,""))}
Related
When calling displayBarNotification(stringIPass, 'success', 3500) of nopcommerce originally defined in public.common.js seems the call fails when stringIPass contains newlines.
The error on the client-side was something like
Unexpected line break in a string literal
I tried replacing the C# newline character in the ajax function to the js equivalent and it worked. However, I intend to keep the "newlines" for readability reasons. What approach would you suggest?
Pardon me for the lack of the exact error expr. but it's because I'm currently not at work. I will update tomorrow if necessary.
Official documentation:
Template literals are string literals allowing embedded expressions. You can use multi-line strings and string interpolation features with them.
Use back-ticks ( ` ) to introduce a template literal:
var example = `
this
is
a
test
`;
console.log(example);
I search through the numerous questions already asked about the "unterminated string literal" syntax error but found nothing helping me ...
So, I have this Javascript function :
function parametresModal($parametres) {
document.getElementById('remodalTest').innerHTML = $parametres;
};
Then I call this function on a link in my page :
<a href="#" onClick='parametresModal("<?php the_field('description-defi'); ?>");'>TEST</a>
The parameter written here is simplified ; I actually want to add this Wordpress ACF's function among others and HTML markup, but I found the issue was appearing with this particular field (see below).
This "parametresModal" function is supposed to fill the following div with its parameters :
<div id="remodalTest">MyDiv</div>
Problem is the console outputs
"SyntaxError: unterminated string literal"
The Wordpress ACF's field "description-defi" contains a few lines of text with some simple quotes (ex. c'est, l'éviter, ...).
So I tried to escape the quotes with several methods :
$myField = the_field('description-defi');
$myEscape = json_encode($myField);
or
$myField = the_field('description-defi');
$myEscape = addshlashes($myField);
or
$myField = the_field('description-defi');
$myEscape = htmlspecialchars($myField);
Always resulting in the same error.
Do you see where I could be wrong in my code or my way of thinking the thing ?
Thank you very much !
the_field() will output the content of the selected field. If you want to work with a field, you should use get_field() instead.
See: https://www.advancedcustomfields.com/resources/the_field/
Also the newline character will not be escaped by any of PHP's escape functions, if your String contains newlines, you will need to escape them manually using something like this: $myField = str_replace(array("\r\n", "\n"), "<br>", $myField);.
If you know that your DB will consistently use the same newline sequence, you can replace array("\r\n", "\n") by that newline sequence instead.
I'm trying to use Freemarker in conjunction with jQuery Templates.
Both frameworks use dollar sign/curly brackets to identify expressions for substitution (or as they're called in freemarker, "interpolations") , e.g. ${person.name} .
So when I define a jQuery Template with expressions in that syntax, Freemarker tries to interpret them (and fails).
I've tried various combinations of escaping the ${ sequence to pass it through Freemarker to no avail - \${, \$\{, $\{, etc.
Inserting a freemarker comment in between the dollar and the curly (e.g. $<#-- -->{expression}) DOES work - but I'm looking for a more concise and elegant solution.
Is there a simpler way to get a Freemarker template to output the character sequence ${?
This should print ${person.name}:
${r"${person.name}"}
From the freemarker docs
A special kind of string literals is the raw string literals. In raw string literals, backslash and ${ have no special meaning, they are considered as plain characters. To indicate that a string literal is a raw string literal, you have to put an r directly before the opening quotation mark or apostrophe-quote
For longer sections without FreeMarker markup, use <#noparse>...</#noparse>.
Starting with FreeMarker 2.3.28, configure FreeMarker to use square bracket syntax ([=exp]) instead of brace syntax (${exp}) by setting the interpolation_syntax configuration option to square_bracket.
Note that unlike the tag syntax, the interpolation syntax cannot be specified inside the template. Changing the interpolation syntax requires calling the Java API:
Configuration cfg;
// ...
cfg.setInterpolationSyntax(SQUARE_BRACKET_INTERPOLATION_SYNTAX);
Then FreeMarker will consider ${exp} to be static text.
Do not confuse interpolation syntax with tag syntax, which also can have square_bracket value, but is independent of the interpolation syntax.
When using FreeMarker-based file PreProcessor (FMPP), either configure the setting via config.fmpp or on the command-line, such as:
fmpp --verbose --interpolation-syntax squareBracket ...
This will call the appropriate Java API prior to processing the file.
See also:
https://freemarker.apache.org/docs/dgui_misc_alternativesyntax.html
http://fmpp.sourceforge.net/settings.html#templateSyntax
Another option is to use #include with parse=false option. That is, put your jQuery Templates into the separate include page and use parse=false so that freemarker doesn't try and parse it.
This would be a good option when the templates are larger and contain double quotes.
I had to spent some time to figure out the following scenarios to escape ${expression} -
In Freemarker assignment:
<#assign var = r"${expression}">
In html attribute:
Some link
In Freemarker concatenation:
<#assign x = "something&"+r"${expression}"/>
If ${ is your only problem, then you could use the alternate syntax in the jQuery Templates plugin like this: {{= person.name}}
Maybe a little cleaner than escaping it.
Did you try $$?
I found from the Freemarker manual that ${r"${person.name}"} will print out ${person.name} without attempting to render it.
Perhaps you should also take a look at Freemarker escaping freemarker
I can confirm that the
${r"${item.id}"}
is the correct way as an example.
So I kinda full example will look like
<span> Remove </span>
and the output will be :
<span> Remove </span>
In the case when you want to use non-raw strings so that you can escape double quotes, apostrophes, etc, you can do the following:
Imagine that you want to use the string ${Hello}-"My friend's friend" inside of a string. You cannot do that with raw strings. What I have used that works is:
${"\x0024{Hello}-\"My friend's friend\""}
I have not escaped the apostrophe since I used double quotes.
I have made this regular expression which does exactly what I want when I test it in e.g. RegExr:
^https?:\/\/(www\.)?(test\.yahoo\.com|sub\.yahoo\.com)?(?!([a-z0-9]+\.)?(localhost|yahoo\.com))(.*)?
However when I test it in javascript it says that the expression is invalid. After hours of debugging I found out that this expression works in javascript:
^https?:\/\/(www\.)?(test\.yahoo\.com|sub\.yahoo\.com)?(?![a-z0-9]+\.)?(localhost|yahoo\.com)(.*)?
However this doesn't do what I want (again testing in RegExr).
Why cannot I use the first expression in javascript? And how do I fix it?
UPDATE JULY 25
Sorry for the lack of info. The way I am using the Regexp is through a jQuery extension which lets me select using regexp. The script can be seen here: http://james.padolsey.com/javascript/regex-selector-for-jquery/
The specific code I am trying to get to work is:
$('a:regex(href, ^https?:\/\/(www\.)?(test\.yahoo\.com|sub\.yahoo\.com)?(?!([a-z0-9]+\.)?(localhost|yahoo\.com))(.*)?)').live('click', function(e) {
After including the linked jQuery plugin. The text strings I am testing are:
http://yahoo.com
http://google.dk
http://subdomain.yahoo.com
http://test.yahoo.com
http://localhost.dk
http://sub.yahoo.com/lalala
Where it is supposed to match "http://google.dk", "http://test.yahoo.com" and "http://sub.yahoo.com/lalala" - which it does when using RegExr but failing (invalid expression) using the jQuery plugin.
The first regular expression is not invalid:
var regexp = /^https?:\/\/(www\.)?(test\.yahoo\.com|sub\.yahoo\.com)?(?!([a-z0-9]+\.)?(localhost|yahoo\.com))(.*)?/;
works fine.
If you want to instantiate the expression from a string, you have to double all the backslashes:
var regexp = new RegExp("^https?:\\/\\/(www\\.)?(test\\.yahoo\\.com|sub\\.yahoo\\.com)?(?!([a-z0-9]+\\.)?(localhost|yahoo\\.com))(.*)?");
When you start from a string, you have to account for the fact that the string constant itself uses backslashes as a quoting mechanism, so there will be two evaluations made: one as a string, and one as a regular expression.
edit — OK I think I see the problem. That plugin you're trying to use is simply attempting to do something that's just not going to work, given the way that Sizzle parses selectors. In other words, the problem is not with your regular expression, it's with the overall selector. It is not even getting far enough to parse the regular expression.
Specifically it seems to be nested parentheses inside the regular expression. Something as simple as
$('a:regex(href, ((abc)))')
causes an error. You can instead do something like this:
$('a').filter(function() {
return /^https?:\/\/(www\.)?(test\.yahoo\.com|sub\.yahoo\.com)?(?!([a-z0-9]+\.)?(localhost|yahoo\.com))(.*)?/.test(this.href);
}).whatever( ... );
I'm trying to find out if a string contains css code with this expression:
var pattern = new RegExp('\s(?[a-zA-Z-]+)\s[:]{1}\s*(?[a-zA-Z0-9\s.#]+)[;]{1}');
But I get "invalid regular expression" error on the line above...
What's wrong with it?
found the regex here: http://www.catswhocode.com/blog/10-regular-expressions-for-efficient-web-development
It's for PHP but it should work in javascript too, right?
What are the ? at the start of the two [a-zA-z-] blocks for? They look wrong to me.
The ? is unfortunately somewhat overload in regexp syntax, it can have three different meanings that I know of, and none of them match what I see in your example.
Also, your \s sequences need the backslash escaping because this is a string - they should look like \\s. To avoid escaping, just use the /.../ syntax instead of new Regexp("...").
That said, even that is insufficient - the regexp still produces an Invalid Group error in Chrome, probably related to the {1} sequences.
The ?'s are messing it up. I'm not sure what they are for.
/\s[a-zA-Z\-]+\s*:\s*[a-zA-Z0-9\s.#]+;/
worked for me (as far as compiling. I didn't test to see if it properly detected a CSS string).
Replace the quotes with / (slashes):
var pattern = /\s([a-zA-Z-]+)\s[:]{1}\s*([a-zA-Z0-9\s.#]+)[;]{1}/;
You also don't need the new RegExp() part either, which is why it's been removed; instead of using a quote or double quote to denote a string, JavaScript uses a slash / to denote a regular expression, which isn't a normal string.
That regular expression is very bad and I would avoid its source in the future. That said, I cleaned it up a bit and got the following result:
var pattern = /\s(?:[a-zA-Z-]+)\s*:\s*(?:[^;\n\r]+);/;
this matches something that looks like css, for example:
background-color: red;
Here's the fiddle to prove it, though I'd recommend to find a different solution to your problem. This is a very simple regex and it's not save to say that it is reliable.