basically so far i have this code trying to make it work crossbrowser. im trying to get an alternative to selectnodes but getting stuck with it only returning one item in the array I make when there meant to be more (as works in IE an currently getting 7) due to erroring after first iterate next. im unsure if im missing something in how im doing this?
try {
var oNodeDefinitions = XMLResponse.selectNodes("//Definitions/Definition");
}
catch (err) {
node = XMLResponse;
var xpe = new XPathEvaluator();
var nsResolver = xpe.createNSResolver(node.ownerDocument == null ? node.documentElement : node.ownerDocument.documentElement);
oNodeDef = xpe.evaluate("//Definitions/Definition", oAJAXRequest.XMLResponse, nsResolver, XPathResult.ORDERED_NODE_ITERATOR_TYPE, null);
a = 0;
b = 0;
var nodes = new Array();
while (oNodeDef) {
try {
nodes[a] = oNodeDef;
oNodeDef = oNodeDef.iterateNext();
a = a + 1;
}
catch(err) {
oNodeDef = false;
}
}
}
alert("a");
Related
Hi im using Angularjs for my project, There is nationality search drop down. I want to map which is typing on Input and filter it inside nationality JSON object. This part is working fine in other browsers except IE. There is console error "Object doesn't support property or method 'startsWith'". this is my code, Can i know how to add "String.prototype.startsWith" for this issue for my code.
$scope.searchNationality = function (data) {
var output = [];
if (data != "" && data != undefined) {
$scope.ShowNationalityDropDown = true;
for (var i = 0; i < $scope.nationalityList.length; i++) {
if ($scope.nationalityList[i].content.toLowerCase().startsWith(data.toLowerCase())) {
output.push($scope.nationalityList[i]);
}
}
$scope.nationalityListSearchResults = output;
} else {
$scope.ShowNationalityDropDown = false;
$scope.nationalityListSearchResults = [];
}
};
You can try changing from .startsWith to .indexOf since it is compatible with IE for lower versions. If .indexOf returns 0 then the string is in the first position of the string that calls that function, which can be usable when you are in this kind of situation that you can't use .startsWith().
const str = "Hey this is a sample string!"
console.log(str.indexOf("Hey") === 0)
console.log(str.indexOf("sample") === 0)
$scope.searchNationality = function (data) {
var thereIsData = data != "" && data != undefined;
var output = thereIsData
? $scope.nationalityList.filter(function (nationality) {
return nationality.content.toLowerCase().indexOf(data.toLowerCase())) == 0;
})
: [];
$scope.ShowNationalityDropDown = thereIsData;
}
Ok, maybe is not the best title, but I lacked inspiration, so here goes:
Let's say you have a "global" (not really) variable to store temporary data and sub data as random users interact with your server. Normally on the first interaction with your server, the main variable will be undefined so you need to handle that case.
Now, what puzzled me about this, is what's the best practice performance wise to do this if there are a lot of users and a lot way more interactions with the variable.
Puzzled? Yeah, I know, words are not my strong point so let me show you in code
So you have
var user_data = [];
Then a function that handles user interaction to store data
function writeData(uid, data_name, data)
Now, on first interaction, user_data[uid][data_name] is undefined, and so it's user_data[uid]
I know you can handle this 2 ways:
With if -
if(!user_data[uid]) user_data[uid] = {}
user_data[uid][data_name] = data
With try/catch
try{user_data[uid][data_name] = data}
catch(e) {user_data[uid] = {}; writeData(uid, data_name, data)}
The if will check on every interaction, and like I said there are a lot.
Try catch will trigger once, but it has a cost as a block (afaik)
Which one is better? Or is there a another better way
#Nertan ,
There is a partiality in your proof :P . I have slightly tweeked the ternary way (same as the order of execution in if way). With this you can conclude.
//var present = require('present');
function test(val,ud,fun) {
var k = 10000000;
var t = Date.now();
for(var i=0; i<k;i++)
{
var uid = Math.ceil(Math.random()*1000);
fun(uid,ud,"value");
}
var tf = Date.now()-t;
return tf;
}
function setValue_Opp(uid,ud,value)
{
(!ud[uid] && (ud[uid] = {})) && (ud[uid].value = value);
}
function setValue_Try(uid,ud,value)
{
try{ ud[uid].value = value}
catch(e){ ud[uid] = {}; setValue_Try(uid,ud,value)};
}
function setValue_Cond(uid,ud,value)
{
if(!ud[uid]) ud[uid] = {}
ud[uid].value = value;
}
var k1=0;
var k2=0;
var k3=0;
for(var i=0;i<10;i++){
k1+=test(1,{}, setValue_Cond);
k2+=test(2,{}, setValue_Try);
k3+=test(3,{}, setValue_Opp);
}
console.log(k1,k2,k3)
I feel we can take advantage of ES6 ternaries as below:
let user_data = {}
const writeData = (uid, data_name, data) => {
((user_data[uid] || (user_data[uid] = {})) && (user_data[uid][data_name] = data ))
console.log(user_data)
// perform write action
}
writeData('1',"test","test1");
writeData('2',"test","test2");
writeData('1',"test","test3");
Ok, so I had to rewrite the test because it doesn't work fine in the Snippet
So I made this for node.js:
var present = require('present');
function test(val,ud,fun) {
var k = 10000000;
var t = present();
for(var i=0; i<k;i++)
{
var uid = Math.ceil(Math.random()*1000);
fun(uid,ud,"value");
}
var tf = present()-t;
console.log("END "+val+" at "+tf);
return tf;
}
function setValue_Opp(uid,ud,value)
{
(ud[uid] || (ud[uid] = {})) && (ud[uid].value = value);
}
function setValue_Try(uid,ud,value)
{
try{ ud[uid].value = value}
catch(e){ ud[uid] = {}; setValue_Try(uid,ud,value)};
}
function setValue_Cond(uid,ud,value)
{
if(!ud[uid]) ud[uid] = {}
ud[uid].value = value;
}
var k1=0;
var k2=0;
var k3=0;
for(var i=0;i<10;i++){
k1+=test(1,{}, setValue_Cond);
k2+=test(2,{}, setValue_Try);
k3+=test(3,{}, setValue_Opp);
}
console.log(k1,k2,k3)
And in the end:
3244.328997004777 3695.0267750024796 3437.6855720058084
Which means:
The best is the classical if
The second best is condintional operators method
And the worst is the try-catch
So it seems the classics win
Edited:
With further tests thanks to #CRayen the best method is :
(!ud[uid] && (ud[uid] = {})) && (ud[uid].value = value);
I'm trying to change the color of elements in 3D Viewer using the Autodesk-forge platform, and for this I'm using this API https://forge.autodesk.com/cloud_and_mobile/2015/12/change-color-of-elements-with-view-and-data-api.html by Daniel Du.
But the problem is when running I got this
The error Pict
And this the function :
Autodesk.Viewing.Viewer3D.prototype.setColorMaterial = function(objectIds, color) {
var material = addMaterial(color);
for (var i=0; i<objectIds.length; i++) {
var dbid = objectIds[i];
//from dbid to node, to fragid
viewer.addEventListener(Autodesk.Viewing.GEOMETRY_LOADED_EVENT, function () {
var it = viewer.model.getData().instanceTree;
console.log(it);
it.enumNodeFragments(dbid, function (fragId) {
var renderProxy = viewer.impl.getRenderProxy(viewer.model, fragId);
console.log("r prox : " + renderProxy);
renderProxy.meshProxy = new THREE.Mesh(renderProxy.geometry, renderProxy.material);
renderProxy.meshProxy.matrix.copy(renderProxy.matrixWorld);
renderProxy.meshProxy.matrixWorldNeedsUpdate = true;
renderProxy.meshProxy.matrixAutoUpdate = false;
renderProxy.meshProxy.frustumCulled = false;
viewer.impl.addOverlay(overlayName, renderProxy.meshProxy);
viewer.impl.invalidate(true);
}, false);
});
}
}
Hopefully, anyone has the solution to this problem...
Most likely you are running this code before the instance tree has been loaded, which provokes the error Cannot read property 'enumNodeFragments' of undefined on it variable. You would need to wait for the Autodesk.Viewing.OBJECT_TREE_CREATED_EVENT before running that code.
Take also a look at previous question about modifying materials in the viewer.
I have a piece of code that I'm trying to get to work on an interface. Basically we take some fields and drop into other segments. The problem seems to be that it leaves the data where it is instead of moving it to the indexed PID segment. Also the CP variable is returning 'undefined' for some reason.
var i = msg['PID']['PID.13'].length();
var homeNum;
var netNum;
var cpNum;
while(i--)
{
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "PRN")
{
homeNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.9'];
}
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "NET")
{
netNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.4'];
}
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "CP")
{
cpNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.9'];
}
msg['PID']['PID.13'][i] = "";
}
msg['PID']['PID.13'][0]['PID.13.1'] = homeNum;
msg['PID']['PID.13'][0]['PID.13.4'] = netNum;
msg['PID']['PID.13'][1]['PID.13.1'] = cpNum;
Sample HL7 msg I am using before transforms (from our test system, NOT live data)
It should resemble this instead:
|9999999999^^^test#test.com~99999999999~~~|
Any ideas/pointers on why it's not moving?
You are missing a toString() when you set the variables. A typical Mirth thing, because you get the E4X object back in the variable instead of the value you expected.
In addition to this, you should check the variables for undefined values before setting them on the new structure because otherwise you end up with "undefined" in the fields.
This is a working solution:
var i = msg['PID']['PID.13'].length();
var homeNum;
var netNum;
var cpNum;
while(i--)
{
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "PRN")
{
homeNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.9'].toString();
}
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "NET")
{
netNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.4'].toString();
}
if (msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.2'].toString() == "CP")
{
cpNum = msg['PID']['PID.13'][i]['PID.13.9'].toString();
}
msg['PID']['PID.13'][i] = "";
}
if(homeNum != null) msg['PID']['PID.13'][0]['PID.13.1'] = homeNum;
if(netNum != null) msg['PID']['PID.13'][0]['PID.13.4'] = netNum;
if(cpNum != null) msg['PID']['PID.13'][1]['PID.13.1'] = cpNum;
I'm getting the following error when attempting to get an enumerator for a collection of lists: "Uncaught Error: The collection has not been initialized. It has not been requested or the request has not been executed. It may need to be explicitly requested."
It happens on the line var listEnumerator = lists.getEnumerator(); it seems to me that there is an issue in my attempt to load lists into the client object with context.load(lists);
Here's the portion of my code that's causing the problem. I've marked the place just before the error is thrown.
//____________________________Required function for accessing the host site's info.___________________________________
function getQueryStringParameter(param) {
var params = document.URL.split("?")[1].split("&");
for (var i = 0; i < params.length; i = i + 1) {
var singleParam = params[i].split("=");
if (singleParam[0] == param) {
return singleParam[1];
}
}
}
//____________________________Begin checking for list_________________________
function checkForList(listToFind, typeOfListToCreateIfTheListIsMissing)
{
var hostUrl = decodeURIComponent(getQueryStringParameter("SPHostUrl"));
var hostcontext = new SP.AppContextSite(context, hostUrl);
var hostweb = hostcontext.get_web();
var lists = hostweb.get_lists();
context.load(lists);
context.executeQueryAsync(checkIfListExistsUsingEnumerator(listToFind, lists, hostweb, typeOfListToCreateIfTheListIsMissing), onQueryFailed);
}
//Failed to get lists for some reason
function onQueryFailed(sender, args) {
alert('We failed to retrieve lists. \n' + args.get_message() + '\n' + args.get_stackTrace());
}
//____________________________Does list exist?____________________________
function checkIfListExistsUsingEnumerator(listToFind, lists, hostweb, typeOfList)
{
var listExists = false;
//!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ERROR HERE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
var listEnumerator = lists.getEnumerator();
var title;
while (listEnumerator.moveNext())
{
title = listEnumerator.get_current().get_title();
if (title == listToFind)
{
listExists = true;
}
}
if (!listExists)
{
alert("It appears that a required list does not already exist. \nClick ok, and we'll automatically create one for you.");
//Create a new list
createList(listToFind, hostweb, typeOfList);
}
else if (listExists)
{
//Do nothing.
}
}
//____________________________If it doesn't, create one on the local site____________________________
function createList(nameOfNewList, hostweb, typeOfList) {
var listCreationInfo = new SP.ListCreationInformation();
listCreationInfo.set_title(nameOfNewList);
if (typeOfList === "events")
{
listCreationInfo.set_templateType(SP.ListTemplateType.events);
}
else if (typeOfList === "contacts")
{
listCreationInfo.set_templateType(SP.ListTemplateType.contacts);
}
var lists = hostweb.get_lists();
var newList = lists.add(listCreationInfo);
context.load(newList);
context.executeQueryAsync(onListCreationSuccess, onListCreationFail);
}
function onListCreationSuccess() {
alert('List created successfully!');
}
function onListCreationFail(sender, args) {
alert('Failed to create the list. ' + args.get_message());
}
I've looked at this question sharepoint javascript collection not initialized error which seems to be fairly similar to mine, but I'm having trouble implementing the solution provided there, making me think my error may be have a different cause.
I've also tried querying for the lists inside of the function that is throwing the error, but that doesn't seem to solve anything.
For a little background, these functions are attempting to read all lists from the app's host site, check to see if a specified list exists, and create a list if no matching list exists. If there's a better way of doing that than what I'm attempting, I'd be open to that too.
Any pointers?
Some things I've tried that don't seem to work:
Changing the Asynchronous query
context.executeQueryAsync(checkIfListExists(listToFind, hostweb, typeOfListToCreateIfTheListIsMissing), onQueryFailed);
to a Synchronous one.
context.executeQuery(checkIfListExists(listToFind, hostweb, typeOfListToCreateIfTheListIsMissing), onQueryFailed);
I've figured out an alternate, and shorter way to method of achieving the same goal I was trying to achieve before.
Instead of checking to see if a list does not already exist, I just try to create a list, and the Query fails to create a list if one is already there. (That's good because I don't want to overwrite the list if it is already there.)
I'm not totally sure if there are any undesired side effects of what I'm doing here, but in my tests it produced the desired behavior.
//____________________________Required function for accessing the host site's info.___________________________________
function getQueryStringParameter(param) {
var params = document.URL.split("?")[1].split("&");
for (var i = 0; i < params.length; i = i + 1) {
var singleParam = params[i].split("=");
if (singleParam[0] == param) {
return singleParam[1];
}
}
}
//____________________________Create a list if one does not already exist_________________________
function createList(listToCreate, typeOfList)
{
// Create an announcement SharePoint list with the name that the user specifies.
var hostUrl = decodeURIComponent(getQueryStringParameter("SPHostUrl"));
var hostContext = new SP.AppContextSite(currentContext, hostUrl);
var hostweb = hostContext.get_web();
var listCreationInfo = new SP.ListCreationInformation();
listCreationInfo.set_title(listToCreate);
if (typeOfList === "events")
{
listCreationInfo.set_templateType(SP.ListTemplateType.events);
}
else if (typeOfList === "contacts")
{
listCreationInfo.set_templateType(SP.ListTemplateType.contacts);
}
var lists = hostweb.get_lists();
var newList = lists.add(listCreationInfo);
currentContext.load(newList);
currentContext.executeQueryAsync(onListCreationSuccess, onListCreationFail);
}
function onListCreationSuccess() {
alert("We've created a list since one doesn't exist yet." );
}
function onListCreationFail(sender, args) {
alert("We didn't create the list. Here's why: " + args.get_message());
}