For obvious reasons we want to start with TS instead of JS in our project.
The problem we occurred are the variables who are set in the MVC Views which are set by the Model of the given View.
E.g. tes.cshtml:
#model Testmodel
<script>
var test = {};
var test.myProp = #Model.Testproperty;
<script>
Now in my test.ts I got an error when I try to get the test-variable because my TypeScript file doesn't know it.
Do I have a architecture miss-conception here? Or is there a trick to do that?
To be honest we have around 100 variables set and / or created in RazorViews, most likely a lot of Ressource-Variables from our resx files we would need e.g. in a java-script alert!
You can create definitions file and put all your global declarations there. For example:
declare interface SampleInterface{
myProp:string;
myFunc(someParameter:string):void;
}
declare var test:SampleInterface;
declare var someFunc: () => number;
More info on writing declaration files here.
One way is to attach to Window all your variables or even all your resource variables and after that you can create something like a helper in typescript where you can parse Window.Variables and Window.ResxVariables for your need.
Server-side you will need two dictionaries Variables and ResxVariables which can be statics in your base controller.
Then you will need two methods that will facilitate adding variables to these dictionaries
Variables.Add("Timezone", "GMT+2");
And
ResxVariables.Add("ExitAlert", "Please stay more");
These two methods will be accessible in your controller actions and you will have the possibility to add model properties too.
Then you will need a HtmlHelper that will help you render those dictionaries as objects attached to Window.
You will need to also support clearing those dictionaries when you render a new page or depends on your need.
When i used something like this, we had two dictionaries GlobalVariables and PageVariables. Global wasn't cleared when we render a new page, but PageVariables was.
Related
I have a feeling that it must be possible to point to template helpers from one template to another. Does anyone know how to do this?
I see in the console that I have access to the Template I want: i.e. Template.Users_edit_page.
And it looks like there is a __helpers object with all the templates defined (Template.Users_edit_page.__helpers).
How can I do something along the lines of:
Template.User_form.prototype.helpers = Template.Users_edit_page.helpers__
and then ideally any helper called from the User_form template (which is a child of the Users_edit_page) would run the Users_edit_page template helper
While I fully encourage digging into the internals of a framework to better understand what it is doing, directly linking into implementation details like this (e.g. *.__helpers) is generally not a good idea, as framework developers may change implementation details breaking your code.
When you use the public APIs you can expect less breaking changes, and advanced notice before that happens (e.g., APIs marked for future deprecation).
As I mentioned in your other question the most flexible approach to sharing helpers across templates is with Template.registerHelper.
However if you need something more targeted you can define your functions as standalone javascript functions:
passwordSecure = function(password) {
return password.length > 8;
};
validEmail = function(email) {
return email.contains('#');
};
Then include them as helpers in all the templates you want them in like this:
Template.User_form.helpers({
'passwordSecure': passwordSecure,
'validEmail': validEmail,
});
I have a Flex application which references a separate MXML file as a template for a custom component. I create instances of the component dynamically several times in my program, but I need to get a handle that will allow me to modify that instance of the component as desired.
I pass specific information to this component on instantiation using bindable public variables in the component's MXML file. I add it to my main program using addChild().
I want to update the component's progressbar as necessary and I want to remove it from the box to which I addChild'd it.
What's the easiest/best way to get a variable that will give me predictable access to each component so I can easily manipulate the components as necessary? Some research suggests creationComplete, but I decided it was faster to just ask than to go through lots of different experiments and come up blank.
Thanks for all the help. : )
Can you not just keep a list of your components in an array? Presumably you have an object reference when you create them and call addChild() on their parent. Why not just put them in an array at the same time?
var list_of_controls:Array = new Array();
var new_Object:<yourType>;
new_Object = new <yourType>();
parent.addChild(new_Object);
list_of_controls.push(new_Object);
then you can get at them...
var my_Object:<yourType>;
for each (my_Object in list_of_controls)
{
// do something
}
You would have to make sure you dispose of them properly when you re done because the reference in your array would keep them in existence until cleared.
If you decide that you want to use getChildren() instead - which you could - take the time to read the documentation because I think it returns a new array with each call.
I hope that helps.
This is my first time here, but I already found some good answers here, so I'd like to thank everyone.
I'm developping a small Flex application and I want to instantiate every class from a package into an array, so I can parse it afterwards. To clarify, I'm trying to ease a plugin management system for my application, with the old canProcess/doProcess routine :
My plugins are all in ONE package, including an abstract plugin class. First, I create one instance of every classes in this package (that's where I need help) and put them in an array. Then, whenever I need a plugin for an item, I parse every plugin class in my array with the canProcess method (the item is the parameter). If one plugin says yes, then I send the item to the doProcess method and stop parsing the array.
I know I could implement by hand every class in my package, but I'd prefer not bothering to do it.
Has anyone an idea ?
Thx
AS3 reflection doesn't allow you to list all classes in a package. You will have to write the class names to an (xml) file at the server, load it and then use getDefinitionByName to get Class objects from those strings and then instantiate them.
Consider the sample xml file:
<root package="boris.ratak">
<className>Plugin1</className>
<className>Plugin2</className>
<className>Plugin3</className>
</root>
load it with URLLoader and parse it like:
import flash.utils.getDefinitionByName;
var pack:String = String(xml.#package) + ".";
for each(var cl:String in xml.className)
{
var name:String = pack + String(cl.text());
var Type:Class = getDefinitionByName(name) as Class;
pluginArray.push(new Type());
}
I'm re-writing an MXML item renderer in pure AS. A problem I can't seem to get past is how to have each item renderer react to a change on a static property on the item renderer class. In the MXML version, I have the following binding set up on the item renderer:
instanceProperty={callInstanceFunction(ItemRenderer.staticProperty)}
What would be the equivalent way of setting this up in AS (using BindingUtils, I assume)?
UPDATE:
So I thought the following wasn't working, but it appears as if Flex is suppressing errors thrown in the instanceFunction, making it appear as if the binding itself is bad.
BindingUtils.bindSetter(instanceFunction, ItemRenderer, "staticProperty");
However, when instanceFunction is called, already initialized variables on the given instance are all null, which was the cause of the errors referenced above. Any ideas why this is?
You have 2 options that I am aware of:
Option 1
You can dig into the code that the flex compiler builds based on your MXML to see how it handles binding to static properties. There is a compiler directive called -keep-generated-actionscript that will cause generated files to stick around. Sleuthing through these can give you an idea what happens. This option will involve instantiating Binding objects and StaticPropertyWatcher objects.
Option 2
There is staticEventDispatcher object that gets added at build time to classes containing static variables see this post http://thecomcor.blogspot.com/2008/07/adobe-flex-undocumented-buildin.html. According to the post, this object only gets added based on the presence of static variables and not getter functions.
Example of Option 2
Say we have a class named MyClassContainingStaticVariable with a static variable named MyStaticVariable and another variable someobject.somearrayproperty that we want to get updated whenever MyStaticVariable changes.
Class(MyClassContainingStaticVariable).staticEventDispatcher.addEventListener(
PropertyChangeEvent.PROPERTY_CHANGE,
function(event:PropertyChangeEvent):void
{
if(event.property == "MyStaticVariable")
{
someobject.somearrayproperty = event.newValue as Array;
}
});
I think you need to respond to the "PropertyChanged" event.
If you're going to do that, use a singleton instead of static. I don't think it will work on a static. (If you have to do it that way at all, there are probably a couple ways you could reapproach this that would be better).
var instance:ItemRenderer = ItemRenderer.getInstance();
BindingUtils.bindProperty(this, "myProperty", instance, "theirProperty");
After fiddling with this for a while, I have concluded that this currently isn't possible in ActionScript, not even with bindSetter. It seems there are some MXML-only features of data bindings judging by the following excerpt from the Adobe docs (though isn't it all compiled to AS code anyways)?
You cannot include functions or array
elements in property chains in a data
binding expression defined by the
bindProperty() or bindSetter() method.
For more information on property
chains, see Working with bindable
property chains.
Source: http://livedocs.adobe.com/flex/3/html/help.html?content=databinding_7.html
You can create a HostProxy class to stand in for the funciton call. Sort of like a HostFunctionProxy class which extends from proxy, and has a getProperty("functionInvokeStringWithParameters") which will invoke the function remotely from the host, and dispatch a "change" event to trigger the binding in typical [Bindable("change")] Proxy class.
You than let the HostProxy class act as the host, and use the property to remotely trigger the function call. Of course, it'd be cooler to have some TypeHelperUtil to allow converting raw string values to serialized type values at runtime for method parameters (splitted by commas usually).
Example:
eg.
var standInHost:Object = new HostFunctionProxy(someModelClassWithMethod, "theMethodToCall(20,11)");
// With BindingUtils.....
// bind host: standInHost
// bind property: "theMethodToCall(20,11)"
Of course, you nee to create such a utlity to help support such functionality beyond the basic Flex prescription. It seems many of such (more advanced) Flex bindings are usually done at compile time, but now you have to create code to do this at runtime in a completely cross-platform Actionscript manner without relying on the Flex framework.
You can access the current template's instance by doing Template.instance(). But you often run into situations where you have to access other templates' instances as well. For example, if you use ReactiveVar, then you would want to get or set variables that are attached to other template instances.
I came across How to get the parent template instance (of the current template) but this is not complete.
Q1. How can we access any template's instance, not just the current template's
Q2. Is it against the Meteor way if I need to access other templates' instances?
you can try to set your template variable directly at the template level instead of inside the instance.
Template.example.myVariable = new ReactiveVar();
instead of
Template.example.onCreated(function (){
this.myVariable = new ReactiveVar();
});
The closest I got was to target the template by one of its elements (assume the template contains a form)
Blaze.getView($('form')[0]).templateInstance().someReactiveVar.set('changed')
If your target templates are in the same file, you can just define the reactive variable outside the template functions, at the beginning of the file. All templates in the file will access it.
If your target template is the parent template, (or any further parent template) you can access its data context using Template.parentData() the argument being the rank of the parent (default is 1). It seems that you know that already.
If you need to access a DOM element within a different template in the same page, you can use jQuery selectors.
I don't know any other way to reach another template instance (afaik, there is no Blaze.getTemplate(name) function.) The answer you are referring to seems to be the better you can get.
I think this is purely subjective, since in Meteor there are so many different ways of doing things, but I actually think Session is perfectly suited for sharing variables across several templates. People argue that Session is bad since it's global and can pollute the namespace. I would argue that it's up to the developer to keep their environment clean in any way that works for them. So for instance, this is bad:
Session.set('count', 23);
Session.set('last', new Date());
But this is better:
Session.set('notifications/count', 23);
Session.set('notificatinos/last', new Date());