I want to dynamically set the binding path of smartfields:
var form = new sap.ui.comp.smartform.SmartForm({
title: "not important"
});
form.bindElement("/param"); //
for (i = 0; i <obj.length; i++){
var elem = new sap.ui.comp.smartfield.SmartField({
value: "{obj[i]getAttribute("name")}"
});
obj[i]getAttribute("name") = name and /param/name = "Aline"
I want the value "Aline" to be display in the field.
Any idea is welcome.
Thank you.
you can try something like below which is using the bindProperty method of ManagedObject (which SmartField inherits from) ...
var elem = new sap.ui.comp.smartfield.SmartField().bindProperty("value",obj[i]getAttribute("name"));
Related
I have two tables that are related as follows:
PMLprojects ONE - MANY Inovice_stat
I have a script to create a record in the Invoice_stat table. It goes as follows:
var myProjectList = app.datasources.PMLprojects;
var myProjectListID = myProjectList.Id;
var myDatasource = app.datasources.Invoice_stat;
var myCreateDatasource = myDatasource.modes.create;
now = new Date();
var draft = myDatasource.modes.create.item;
draft.EmailStatus = "Yes";
draft.PaidStatus = "No";
draft.DateCreate = now;
myCreateDatasource.createItem(function(newRecord) {
var key = newRecord._key;
});
myDatasource.saveChanges();
All the fields are properly populates except the relation to PMLprojects. How can I related the record from Invoice_stat to PMLprojects? I'm getting the following message:
Error log :
com.google.apps.appmaker.client.datasource.AbstractModelDataSource
WARNING: Could not select element with key RecordKey{key=private$6,
model
key=1Y8Ijd68IZyWFllY3d_C9fhAOFtVgKCtH|Gu5LnmmFmZHfEbrL5Ug1fybNaVLSEPn6}.
No records bound.
Here is some proposed edited code for you to try. However, do remember that if your PMLprojects datasource is not loaded on the client, then this will still fail. I also highly recommend that you check out the official documentation here https://developers.google.com/appmaker/models/relations#modify_associations.
var myProjectList = app.datasources.PMLprojects.item; //change this line to point to an item in the datasource
//var myProjectListID = myProjectList.Id; This line is not necessary
var myDatasource = app.datasources.Invoice_stat;
var myCreateDatasource = myDatasource.modes.create;
now = new Date();
var draft = myCreateDatasource.item; //you already declared the create mode
draft.EmailStatus = "Yes";
draft.PaidStatus = "No";
draft.DateCreate = now;
draft.YourRelationToPMLprojects = myProjectList; //here is where you create your relation, replace YourRelationToPMLprojects with your actual relation name should show up in code autocomplete
myCreateDatasource.createItem(function(newRecord) {
var key = newRecord._key;
});
myDatasource.saveChanges();
Since you are probably using both tables with the Manual Save mode... then #MarkusMalessa's approach might return you an error. If that is so, you have to make sure that you create the relation after you create the item but before you save changes. For that, take into consideration the following example:
var project = app.datasources.PMLprojects.item; //project item
var ds = app.datasources.Invoice_stat;
var createDs = ds.modes.create;
var draft = createDs.item;
draft.EmailStatus = "Yes";
draft.PaidStatus = "No";
draft.DateCreate = new Date();
createDs.createItem(function(){
ds.item.PMLproject = project; //here is where you create your relation
ds.saveChanges();
});
Just remember, this will only work as long as the PMLprojects datasource has already been loaded, otherwise you will probably get an error.
I am attempting to create a serializer that will change the properties of an object.
Example:
class testobj{
var prop1:Int = 3
var prop2:String = "Hello"
var prop3:Dictionary<String,String> = Dictionary<String,String>()
}
I know I can access the names and types of the properties using
reflect(testobjc())[0].1
and
var tester = testobj()
_std_lib_DemangledTypeName(tester.prop1)
but what I would like to do is something like
var tester = testobj()
for(var x:Int = 0; x < reflect(testobj()).count; x++){
if(_std_lib_DemangledTypeName(tester.(reflect(testobj())[0].1)) == "Swift.String"){
tester.(reflect(testobj())[0].1) = "World!"
}
}
Essentially, I want to loop through all the properties listed for a given class and set the properties on a newly created object of that class. Any guidance would be appreciated. Swift reflection is new to me.
You could use this class to create a dictionary form an object and an object from a dictionary.
https://github.com/evermeer/EVReflection
I have 2 dynamic objects and I want to build one to contain all the properties:
var o1:Object = {prop1:val1,prop2:val2,prop3:val3};
var o2:Object = {prop3:val3a,prop4:val4};
and I need to obtain a third object that looks like that:
{prop1:val1, prop2:val2, prop3:val3a, prop4:val4};
Basically I need a way to iterate through the object properties and to add new properties to the third object. I have to mention I'm quite new to AS3/Flash/Flex.
First question, do you really mean to have prop3 in both objects? you will need to decide what to do in case of a collision like that, which object has precedence.
Secondly, check out the introspection apis: http://livedocs.adobe.com/flex/3/html/help.html?content=usingas_8.html
something like this should work:
public function mergeDynamicObjects ( objectA:Object, objectB:Object ) : Object
{
var objectC:Object = new Object();
var p:String;
for (p in objectA) {
objectC[p] = objectA[p];
}
for (p in objectB) {
objectC[p] = objectB[p];
}
return objectC;
}
If the property exists in A and B, B's will overwrite A's. Also note that if the values of a property is an object, it will pass a reference, not a copy of the value. You might need to clone the object in those cases, depending on your needs.
Note: I haven't actually tested the above, but it should be close. Let me know if it doesn't work.
Updated to fix the errors. Glad it works for you though.
You can dynamically access/set properties on objects with the index operator. The for loop will itterate over the property names, so if you put it all together, the following test passes:
[Test]
public function merge_objects():void {
var o1:Object = {prop1:"one", prop2:"two", prop3:"three"};
var o2:Object = {prop3:"threeA", prop4:"four"};
var o3:Object = new Object();
for (var prop in o1) o3[prop] = o1[prop];
for (var prop in o2) o3[prop] = o2[prop];
assertThat(o3.prop1, equalTo("one"));
assertThat(o3.prop2, equalTo("two"));
assertThat(o3.prop3, equalTo("threeA"));
assertThat(o3.prop4, equalTo("four"));
}
you can iterate over the object properties like:
var obj1:Object = new Object();
for(var str:String in obj2){
obj1[str] = "any value"; // insert the property from obj2 to obj1
}
xml values are stored in 'arr' array collection. depending on the length of the array stored, the below described components are created and assign those values to relevant components dynamically.
For Example:
AdvanceSearch.mxml is one component, and another components as advanceSearchAtom.mxml. within 'advanceSearchAtom' has some sub components as textbox, combo box etc,. we can add many advanceSearchAtom.mxml inside 'AdvanceSearch.mxml'.
var container : AdvanceSearch;
var adv : advanceSearchAtom;
for(var i:int=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
adv = new advanceSearchAtom();
adv.field.text = arr[i].field;
adv.value.selectedIndex = arr[i].value;
container.addChild(adv);
}
Please let me know if anybody come across this type of problem. if any relevant link is appreciable. Thanks in advance
You didn't mention it, but I guess the problem is that you're getting null reference error (1009) on the following lines:
adv.field.text = arr[i].field;
adv.value.selectedIndex = arr[i].value;
Am I right?
This is because field and value are not yet created. As per the default component instantiation, Flex creates the children only when it is required - i.e., when it is to be displayed.
You can either listen to the creationComplete event of the AdvanceSearchAtom component and update the values from there; or have Binadble public variables in the AdvanceSearchAtom class, bind them to field.text and value.selectedIndex and assign xml values to those variables in the loop.
Using creation complete:
public var container:AdvanceSearch;
public var searchItems:Array = [];
public var arr:Array;
//assuming that arr has been initialized with xml values.
var adv:AdvanceSearchAtom;
for(var i:int=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
adv = new AdvanceSearchAtom();
adv.addEventListener(FlexEvent.CREATION_COMPLETE, onAtomCreated);
container.addChild(adv);
searchItems.push(adv);
}
public function onAtomCreated(e:Event):void
{
var adv:AdvanceSearchAtom = e.currentTarget as AdvanceSearchAtom;
if(!adv)
return;
var index:Number = searchItems.indexOf(adv);
adv.field.text = arr[index].field;
adv.value.selectedIndex = arr[index].value;
}
Using data binding:
Inside AdvanceSearchAtom.mxml
<mx:TextInput id="field" text="{textValue}"/>
<mx:ComboBox id="value" selectedIndex="{comboIndex}"/>
In the script block of AdvanceSearchAtom.mxml
[Bindable]
public var textValue:String;
[Bindable]
public var comboIndex:Number;
var adv:AdvanceSearchAtom;
In the AdvanceSearch class:
for(var i:int=0;i<arr.length;i++) {
adv = new AdvanceSearchAtom();
container.addChild(adv);
adv.field.text = arr[i].field;
adv.value.selectedIndex = arr[i].value;
}
Ruby on Rails controllers will automatically convert parameters to an array if they have a specific format, like so:
http://foo.com?x[]=1&x[]=5&x[]=bar
This would get converted into the following array:
['1','5','bar']
Is there any way I can do this with an ActionScript 3 HTTPService object, by using the request parameter? For example, It would be nice to do something like the following:
var s:HTTPService = new HTTPService();
s.request['x[]'] = 1;
s.request['x[]'] = 5;
s.request['x[]'] = 'bar';
However, that will simply overwrite each value, resulting in only the last value being sent. Anyone have a better idea? I know I could just append stuff to the query string, but I'd like to do it in the POST body.
I was working on this same problem as well. Fortunatly, Flex supports this out of the box.
Just use an Array for the field value:
var service:HTTPService = new HTTPService();
service.useProxy = true;
service.destination = "myservicet";
service.resultFormat = HTTPService.RESULT_FORMAT_XML;
var fields:Array = ["categories", "organisation"];
var params:Object = new Object();
params.q = "stackoverflow";
params.rows = 0;
params.facet = "true";
params["facet.field"] = fields;
service.send(params);
The HTTPService will convert this t0 the url parameters:
facet=true&q=stackoverflow&facet%2Efield=categories&facet%2Efield=organisation&rows=0
Hope this helps!
Added for more clarity. When there is only 1 argument in the array, do not pass the fields as an array. For some reason, flex will not send this to the http service
I usually do something like this...
var s:HTTPService = new HTTPService();
s.url = "http://foo.com";
s.method = "post";
// add listeners...
s.addEventListenser(ResultEvent.RESULT,function(event:ResultEvent){
mx.controls.Alert.show(event.result.toString());
});
// send the data...
s.send({
a: 1,
b: 5,
c: "bar"
});
which would result in the HTTP Get / POST of:
http://foo.com?a=1&b=5&c=bar
You could also just create an associative array and pass it to the HTTPService send method, that would be something like:
var postdata:Object = {};
postdata["a"] = 1;
postdata["b"] = 5;
postdata["c"] = "bar";
// s is the HTTPService from above...
s.send(postdata);
You mentioned that All POST parameters must have the same name.
Elements that have the same name will overwrite each other in an associative array.
However, I have dealt with calendar cells before, and all 31 cells belong to the Date category.
What I did was:
var params:Object = new Object;
for (var i:uint=0; i<31; i++){
params["Date"+(jj.toString())] = date[i];
}
HTTPService....etc.
HTTPService.send(params);
So, on the POST receiving side, it would be interpreted as Date0...Date31.
Don't know if this was what you wanted, and the post was so long ago.
Come to think about it.
Why don't you do an array push of all of the elements under the same index name?
However, this means you are sending an array to the receiving side.
If you are POST-ing this, how will this be URL-referenced?