I have implemented a feature that shows people their rarest role (the role that the least people have). I did it by looping through each of their roles and checking how many people have the role. As it turns out, if you have over like 50 roles, it delays the bots response visibly, so I was wondering if there is a more efficient way of doing the same thing. My code is here:
const rolesOfMember = member._roles
for(const role in rolesOfMember) {
var membersHavingCurrentRole = message.guild.roles.cache.get(rolesOfMember[role]).members.size
if(membersHavingCurrentRole < membersHavingRarestRole) {
membersHavingRarestRole = membersHavingCurrentRole
rarestRoleID = rolesOfMember[role]
} else if(membersHavingCurrentRole == membersHavingRarestRole) {
var rarestRole = message.guild.roles.cache.get(rarestRoleID)
var currentRole = message.guild.roles.cache.get(rolesOfMember[role])
if(rarestRole.comparePositionTo(currentRole) < 0) {
membersHavingRarestRole = membersHavingCurrentRole
rarestRoleID = rolesOfMember[role]
}
}
}
Well, one way to simplify your code would be to not have to call message.guild.roles.cache.get() 3 or so times for every role that the member has, especially if they're going to have 50+ roles. In fact, we could eliminate the need for your member._roles object entirely, and therefore eliminate the need for the for/in loop. Here's an example (tested and works):
var rolesOfMember = message.member.roles.cache;
var rarestRole = rolesOfMember.sort((roleA, roleB) => roleA.members.size - roleB.members.size).first();
var rarestRoleID = rarestRole.id;
In this example, I first get the Collection of all of the roles that the member has. Then, I use the Collection.sort() method to sort the roles based on how many members have each role in the guild (from least to greatest, so in other words from rarest to most common). Since the first role in this sorted Collection will be the rarest role that the user has, I simply call Collection.first() on the sorted Collection in order to retrieve the first and rarest Role. From there, you can use rarestRole however you'd like, I simply retrieve the role's ID and store it in a variable in my example.
You can also alter the sorting function however you'd like in order to consider the case in which two roles have the same amount of people who have them.
Relevant resources:
https://discord.js.org/#/docs/main/stable/class/Role?scrollTo=members
https://discord.js.org/#/docs/collection/master/class/Collection?scrollTo=sort
Related
Apologies if this question has been answered elsewhere, I have had trouble finding any resources on this.
The scenario is this. I have created a custom field in the Tax Preferences screen called Usrapikey.
This value holds an api key for a call that gets done in some custom business logic.
The custom business logic however occurs on the Taxes screen.
So within the event handler I need to access that API key value from the other screen. I have tried instantiating graphs and using linq and bql but to no avail.
below is what I have currently and my error is: No overload for method 'GetExtension' takes 1 arguments
If I am going about this the wrong way please let me know if there is a more civilized way to do this
protected virtual void _(Events.FieldUpdated<TaxRev, TaxRev.startDate> e)
{
var setup = PXGraph.CreateInstance<TXSetupMaint>();
var TXSetupEX = setup.GetExtension<PX.Objects.TX.TXSetupExt>(setup);
var rateObj = GetValues(e.Row.TaxID, TXSetupEX.Usrapikey);
decimal rate;
var tryRate = (Decimal.TryParse(rateObj.rate.combined_rate, out rate));
row.TaxRate = (decimal)rate * (decimal)100;
row.TaxBucketID = 1;
}
Many Thanks!
Well, acumatica support got back. It seems if you want to access the base page use:
TXSetup txsetup = PXSetup<TXSetup>.Select(Base);
To get the extension use:
TXSetupExt rowExt = PXCache<TXSetup>.GetExtension<TXSetupExt>(txsetup);
Then you can access the extension fields like so:
var foo = rowExt.Usrfield;
I have a list of valid values that I am storing in a data store. This list is about 20 items long now and will likely grow to around 100, maybe more.
I feel there are a variety of reasons it makes sense to store this in a data store rather than just storing in code. I want to be able to maintain the list and its metadata and make it accessible to other services, so it seems like a micro-service data store.
But in code, we want to make sure only values from the list are passed, and they can typically be hardcoded. So we would like to create an enum that can be used in code to ensure that valid values are passed.
I have created a simple node.js that can generate a JS file with the enum right from the data store. This could be regenerated anytime the file changes or maybe on a schedule. But sharing the enum file with any node.js applications that use it would not be trivial.
Has anyone done anything like this? Any reason why this would be a bad approach? Any feedback is welcome.
Piggy-backing off of this answer, which describes a way of creating an "enum" in JavaScript: you can grab the list of constants from your server (via an HTTP call) and then generate the enum in code, without the need for creating and loading a JavaScript source file.
Given that you have loaded your enumConstants from the back-end (here I hard-coded them):
const enumConstants = [
'FIRST',
'SECOND',
'THIRD'
];
const temp = {};
for (const constant of enumConstants) {
temp[constant] = constant;
}
const PlaceEnum = Object.freeze(temp);
console.log(PlaceEnum.FIRST);
// Or, in one line
const PlaceEnum2 = Object.freeze(enumConstants.reduce((o, c) => { o[c] = c; return o; }, {}));
console.log(PlaceEnum2.FIRST);
It is not ideal for code analysis or when using a smart editor, because the object is not explicitly defined and the editor will complain, but it will work.
Another approach is just to use an array and look for its members.
const members = ['first', 'second', 'third'...]
// then test for the members
members.indexOf('first') // 0
members.indexOf('third') // 2
members.indexOf('zero') // -1
members.indexOf('your_variable_to_test') // does it exist in the "enum"?
Any value that is >=0 will be a member of the list. -1 will not be a member. This doesn't "lock" the object like freeze (above) but I find it suffices for most of my similar scenarios.
It may be I'm still thinking in the Linq2Sql mode, but I'm having a hard time translating this to OrmLite.
I have a customers table and a loyalty card table.
I want to get a list of customers and for each customer, have a list of express cards.
My strategy is to select customers, join to loyalty cards, group by whole customer table, and then map the cards to a single property on customer as a list.
Things are not named by convention, so I don't think I can take advantage of the implicit joins.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Here is the code I have now that doesn't work:
query = query.Join<Customer, LoyaltyCard>((c, lc) => c.CustomerId == lc.CustomerId)
.GroupBy(x => x).Select((c) => new { c, Cards = ?? What goes here? });
Edit: I thought maybe this method:
var q = db.From<Customer>().Take(1);
q = q.Join<Customer, LoyaltyCard>().Select();
var customer = db.SelectMulti<Customer,LoyaltyCard>(q);
But this is giving me an ArgumentNullException on parameter "key."
It's not clear from the description or your example code what you're after, but you can fix your SelectMulti Query with:
var q = db.From<Customer>()
.Join<Customer, LoyaltyCard>();
var results = db.SelectMulti<Customer,LoyaltyCard>(q);
foreach (var tuple in results)
{
Customer customer = tuple.Item1;
LoyaltyCard custCard = tuple.Item2;
}
Is it possible to select a single object from a group created like this?
var r = new fabric.Rect(...);
var l = new fabric.Line(...);
var roadGroup = new fabric.Group([r,l],{ ... });
So I want to have a group, but select objects l or r separately.
The simple answer is yes, but you should make sure you take into account the purpose of a group.
To get a handle on an object that is wrapped in a group you can do something like this:
var r = roadGroup._objects[0];
var l = roadGroup._objects[1];
To select a child of a group try something like this:
fabricCanvas.setActiveObject(roadGroup._objects[0]);
soapbox:
The purpose of creating a group is to treat several objects as if they were a single one. The purpose of selecting an object is to allow user interactions with an object. If you want your user to interact with a portion of a group, you might want to consider not grouping them in the first place, or else un-grouping them prior to selecting the child object.
/soapbox
I believe _objects is to be used internally only and may thus change in the future.
To me it group.item(indexOfItem) seems to be the way
So I had this scenario where I have multiple images in a box. Those all images move along with the box (as a group) but user should also be able to select an individual image and move it.
Basically I wanted to select individual objects (in my case images) of group, I did it like this:
groupImages.forEach(image => image.on('mousedown', function (e) {
var group = e.target;
if (group && group._objects) {
var thisImage = group._objects.indexOf(image);
var item = group._objects[thisImage];//.find(image);
canvas.setActiveObject(item);
}
}));
groupImages could be list of objects which you want to select individually.
I try to get the Subgroup of a Group in the standard Cognos Namespace.
Quering the Contentstore to get ALL groups works fine.
The standard methodes to get "members" of objects return the users or only the "root" group (the group I want the subgroups of). Nothing else....
Am I doing something wrong or is it just "not to be done" ?
I found a way of doing it:
Assuming you have the searchpath for the group you want the subgroups of.
Query the contentstore for it with following PropEnum:
PropEnum[] props = {
PropEnum.defaultName,
PropEnum.searchPath,
PropEnum.members };
As result you get a BaseClass[] object (with only one element though...).
Import com.cognos.developer.schemas.bibus._3.Group <--- this is part of the Cognos SDK libraries and
now you can cast the object[0] to Group.
object.getMembers().getValue()[] is an array of all members INCLUDING groups, roles, accounts.
In java it looks like this (query for the object already done):
Group group = (Group)object[0];
BaseClass obj = null;
for (int i = 0; i < group.getMembers().getValue().length; i++){
obj = group.getMembers().getValue();
System.out.println(obj.getSearchPath().getValue());
}