We're using LCDS and the "commitRequiredOn" method in the DataService class to check if there are pending changes for an entity. However, it seems like "commitRequiredOn" does not check the complete graph of an object, but just the object itself. For now, we have implemented a recursive check on the complete object graph, but this seems like functionality that should come out of the box.
Am I missing something here, or is there just no built-in way to recursively check an entity to see if it's dirty or not?
I can confirm that commitRequiredOn is checking only the objects itself. But there is also the property DataService.commitRequired (and this is checking for all the objects managed by the dataservice) - maybe you can use it.
Related
While using Revit API and browsing the "RevitAPI.chm" file (and browsing examples on the internet), I have noticed that some methods exist while not being listed neither in the "RevitAPI.chm" file nor suggested when using RevitPythonShell.
I explain. Let's say for instance that I have a "Space" Object, obtained with
s = FilteredElementCollector(doc).OfClass(SpatialElement).ToElements()
If I do, let's say (assuming s[0] is a valid Space object):
s[0].Geometry
I got an 'indexer object':
<indexer# object at 0x0000000000000049>
But if I do:
s[0].get_Geometry(Options())
Then I got my GeometryElement object. The same behavior goes with get_BoundingBox, for instance.
Now, that's fine, but the only way I could know about these get_something methods is by seeing examples (either on the "RevitAPI.chm", or on forums etc.). So that's kind of strange, isn't it? In the sense that these methods aren't actually listed.
So I guess my questions would be:
Is it the normal behavior? (or should I normally just get a GeometryElement object by using s[0].Geometry, for instance?)
If yes, ... why ? :D
What are these 'indexers' ?
Thanks!
Arnaud.
PS: Using Revit 2017, tests made with RevitPythonShell and pyRevit
The methods prefixed by a lowercase get_ are automatically generated getter methods. The official Revit API provides and documents the BoundingBox property on the Element class. Rather inelegantly, this so-called property takes an argument. Therefore, the C# .NET implementation generates a property getter function for it.
I haven't found anything about this.
In PL/SQL, if I provide a constructor for an object, the default one will still be created, or it's like in C++ or Java?
Yes, the default constructor is still there. Incidently, if you create another constructor with the same name and arguments you'll get an error PLS-307: too many declarations of ... when you try to use it.
Skimming through the nodejs docs I see options objects being passed to configure features in the http library. However I don't see a quick way to access the original options that were used in a http.request(options, callback) call to construct a http.ClientRequest object, after the fact. Are original options available through the request object and not deemed private, or should I instead hold my own reference to the original options in case I want to use them later?
I assume the options are composited inside the http.ClientRequest object, but that could be wrong.
I could probably try going either way with this (dig into composited info, or pass around an external reference to it), but am new enough to nodejs that I want some sage advice first, to find out what I should do if the option object's available, and by using best practice.
You should always keep your own reference. Most of the time you have no way of telling what's going to happen to that object after you pass it to a constructor. Almost everybody leaves it alone, but some libraries/modules may have side-effects on it. For example, you may see source code doing:
options.foo = options.foo || 'bar';
...modifying your object. So you may even have to clone your object before passing it to a constructor if you want to keep a reference to it.
As for ClientRequest in particular, it doesn't hold a public reference to the options object, but it has properties that match some of the options like req.path or req.port.
I would like to use collective.easytemplate to generate templated emails (for content rules). However, I am not sure if it can output an objects workflow state. Anybody know if it is possible and how it is done?
Thanks.
You can, it is possible, and one way is to use the portal_workflow tool e.g. from parts/omelette/plone/app/contentrules/tests/test_action_workflow.py:
self.assertEquals('published',
self.portal.portal_workflow.getInfoFor(self.folder.d1, 'review_state'))
More generally, something like:
context.portal_workflow.getInfoFor(context, 'review_state')
in a page template should work. Or use the portal_catalog as Spanky suggests e.g. if "obj" is a catalog "brain" (i.e. part of a result set from a catalog search) then:
obj.review_state
should work.
The portal_catalog also has an index of the workflow's Review State, so if you don't already have the object you're working on (e.g. context ≠ the object) you could use the catalog, look up the object and get the review state from the resulting "brains" object.
Apparently there are ALSO browser view methods available to you as well, and I notice that one of them is workflow_state. See:
http://plone.org/documentation/manual/theme-reference/page/otherinfo
When using .contains() on an ArrayCollection in Flex, it will always look at the memory reference. It does not appear to look at an .equals() method or .toString() method or anything overridable. Instead, I need to loop through the ArrayCollection every time and check each individual item until I find what I'm looking for.
Does anyone know why Flex/ActionScript was made this way? Why not provide a way from people to use the contains() method the way they want?
Couldn't you just extend ArrayCollection and override the contains() method? Alternatively you can paste the source for ArrayCollection into an "mx/collections" package in your project and modify the source; this "monkey-patching technique" will override the behavior throughout your entire project. However I would be extremely cautious about changing ArrayCollection in that manner: since it's used all over the place in the Flex APIs there is a good chance you'll start breaking other components in the framework.
The contains() method searches by reference, correct (I believe even for primitives), so if you're trying to find a string or an int in an ArrayCollection, you'll have to do the searching yourself, by some variation of looping or searching. I don't think any of us could tell you why there isn't, say, an optional parameter on that method indicating whether to search by ref or by val, though; so it goes, as they say.
But I'd definitely warn you off monkey-patching the framework code -- that's just asking for trouble. :)
Well, it seems like the ArrayCollection doesn't actually look directly at memory, but only as a last resort. It will attempt to find a Unique ID (UID) for the object. If the UID doesn't exist, it will create one for it using the UIDUtil.as.
You can get around this whole default UID stuff by having your object implement the IUID interface and providing your own UID for the object. The ArrayCollection will look at the UID you provide it.
I would suggest a simple:
in_array($haystack, $arrayCollection->toArray());