In Fulfillment, I need to call the same function for no. of intents. Current code is given below.
I want to create a single app.intent(instead of multiple like mentioned below) functions for multiple intents. I need to create a single app.Intent function put all the possible intent names.
Please help me out how to achieve this.
app.intent('Intent1', (conv,{vardata})=>{
Result(vardata);
});
app.intent('Intent2', (conv,{vardata})=>{
Result(vardata);
});
app.intent('Intent3', (conv,{vardata})=>{
Result(vardata);
});
Result(vardata)
{
//do something based on vardata value
}
You should be able to combine the handlers into one by providing an array instead of a single string value as a name.
app.intent(['Intent1', 'Intent2', 'Intent3'], (conv,{vardata})=>{
Result(vardata);
});
Result(vardata)
{
//do something based on vardata value
}
Related
In the screenshot below, I have got an utterance conflict, which is obvious because I am using similar patterns of samples in both the utterances.
My question is, the skill I am developing requires similar kind of patterns in multiple utterances and I cannot force users to say something like “Yes I want to continue”, or “I want to store…”, something like this.
In such a scenario what is the best practice to avoid utterance conflicts and that too having the multiple similar patterns?
I can use a single utterance and based on what a user says, I can decide what to do.
Here is an example of what I have in my mind:
User says something against {note}
In the skill I check this:
if(this$inputs.note.value === "no") {
// auto route to stop intent
} else if(this$inputs.note.value === "yes") {
// stays inside the same intent
} else {
// does the database stuff and saves the value.
// then asks the user whether he wants to continue
}
The above loop continues until the user says “no”.
But is this the right way to do it? If not, what is the best practice?
Please suggest.
The issue is really that for those two intents you have slots with no context around them. I'm also assuming you're using these slots as catch-all slots meaning you want to capture everything the person says.
From experience: this is very difficult/annoying to implement and will not result in a good user experience.
For the HaveMoreNotesIntent what you want to do is have a separate YesIntent and NoIntent and then route the user to the correct function/intent based on the intent history (aka context). You'll have to just enable this in your config file.
YesIntent() {
console.log(this.$user.$context.prev[0].request.intent);
// Check if last intent was either of the following
if (
['TutorialState.TutorialStartIntent', 'TutorialLearnIntent'].includes(
this.$user.$context.prev[0].request.intent
)
) {
return this.toStateIntent('TutorialState', 'TutorialTrainIntent');
} else {
return this.toStateIntent('TutorialState', 'TutorialLearnIntent');
}
}
OR if you are inside a state you can have yes and no intents inside that state that will only work in that state.
ISPBuyState: {
async _buySpecificPack() {
console.log('_buySpecificPack');
this.$speech.addText(
'Right now I have a "sports expansion pack". Would you like to hear more about it?'
);
return this.ask(this.$speech);
},
async YesIntent() {
console.log('ISPBuyState.YesIntent');
this.$session.$data.productReferenceName = 'sports';
return this.toStatelessIntent('buy_intent');
},
async NoIntent() {
console.log('ISPBuyState.NoIntent');
return this.toStatelessIntent('LAUNCH');
},
async CancelIntent() {
console.log('ISPBuyState.CancelIntent()');
return this.toStatelessIntent('LAUNCH');
}
}
I hope this helps!
I hope someone can help me with this.
I have built an application that uses node.js to fulfil my intent in dialogflow.
For example, I have an intent with one required action:
It goes to my fulfilment:
// Handle the Dialogflow intent named 'Default Welcome Intent'.
app.intent(DEFAULT_INTENT, (conv, params) => {
let categoryId = params.category;
let options = {
'method': 'GET',
'url': apiUrl + 'questions/categories/' + categoryId + '/scenario',
'json': true
};
return request(options).then(response => {
// TODO: What happens if there is more than one question?
let question = response[0];
conv.ask(question.text);
}, error => {
conv.ask('There was an issue with the request: ' + options.url);
});
});
As you can see, this asks a question based on the category sent to the fulfilment.
The problem I have is that the response I want from the user is different for each question.
Once they have responded, it will also have a fulfilment that will ask another question.
Is it possible to do it this way and if so, can someone give me an example of how? If not, can someone help me work out what the alternative is?
The approach you're using makes sense. The key thing to remember is that Intents capture what the user says, not how you handle what they say. You can influence which Intent gets triggered by setting an Input Context, and making sure you have previously set an Output Context for it.
One possible approach would be that for each question you're asking, you set a corresponding Output Context for that question. You can then have one or more Intents that take this as the Input Context. These are otherwise regular Intents, so you'd handle them normally. You might want to clear the context (by setting its lifespan to 0) after it matches, so you don't accidentally match it later.
For example, if your question contains, not only the text of the question, but also the context name of the question, the code might look something like this:
conv.ask( question.text );
conv.contexts.set( question.contextName, 5 );
Let's say that the question object looks something like this
{
text: "What is your favorite color?",
contextName: "color-favorite"
}
You might have a Dialogflow Intent that handles this that looks something like this
Note that the Output Context has explicitly set it to 0, which will remove it. You can also do this in your fulfillment code with something like
conv.contexts.delete( 'color-favorite' );
After this question:
How set a function into limits parameters on multer?
that it doesn't receive an answer, I'm looking for an alternative and I'm seeing formidable.
I found different tutorial and now I have this code:
exports.formidable= function (req, res, cb){
var form = new formidable.IncomingForm();
form.multiples = true;
form.parse(req, function(err, fields, files) {
res.end(util.inspect({fields: fields, files: files}));
});
form.on('end', function(fields, files) {
for(var i = 0; i < this.openedFiles.length; i++) {
/* Temporary location of our uploaded file /
var temp_path = this.openedFiles[i].path;
/ The file name of the uploaded file /
var file_name =Date.now()+"-"+ this.openedFiles[i].name;
/ Location where we want to copy the uploaded file */
var new_location = './files/';
fs.move(temp_path, new_location + file_name, function (err) {
if (err) {
console.error(err);
} else {
console.log("success!")
}
});
}
});
return;
};
Now, if I iterate files in the first part of the code I receive some thing like [{input_file1:{file's attributes}},
{input_file2:{file's attributes}}]
and iterating openedFiles:
[{0: {file's attributes},
{1:file's attributes}}]
Now, can I be certain the both objects are in the same order?
And, if the answer, as I suppose, is not, can I retrieve the input name from the second object?
If it's impossible, there are some workaround to do that?
Thanks for your help!
I found a "dirty" solution but for now it works fine so I want share with you my code.
In rules_upload.js I add this code:
var tmp='';
var x=0;
form.on('fileBegin', function(name, file) {
if(x>0)
{
this.openedFiles[(x-1)].fieldName=tmp;
}
x++;
tmp=name;
});
form.on('end', function(fields, files) {
this.openedFiles[(this.openedFiles.length-1)].fieldName=tmp;
So I adda new attribute called fieldName to retrieve this information!
This may be a vary bad idea, or a possible solution that we have to a database concurrency problem.
We have a method that is called to do an update of a mongo record. We are seeing some concurrency problems - process A reads the record, process B reads the record, process A makes mods and saves the record, process makes B mods and saves the record. Because B reads after A, before A writes, it doesn't know about the changes A made, and we lose the data from A.
I'm wondering if we could not use a database semaphore, basically a field on the collection, that is a boolean. If we read the record at the start of the method, and the field is true, it's being edited. At that point, re-call the method using process.nexttick(), with the same data. Otherwise, set the semaphore, and carry on.
There would still be a bit of time between the read and the save, but it should be/could be faster than what we are doing now.
Be something like this. Any thoughts, anyone done anything like this? Will it even work?
function remove_source(service_id,session, next)
{
var User = Mongoose.model("User");
/* get the user, based on the session user id */
User.findById(session.me,function(err,user_info)
{
if (user_info.semaphore === true)
{
process.nextTick(remove_source(service_id,session,next));
}
else
{
user_info.semaphore = true;
user_info.save(function(err,user_new)
{
if (err) next(err,user_new);
else continue_on(null,user_new);
});
}
function continue_on(user_new)
{
etc.......
}
Edit: New Code:
The function now looks as follows. I'm doing individual updates to the arrays. This of course means that I now have the possibility, if the transaction fails between the first and second transactions, of having data out of sync. I'm thinking that I could simply resave the user object that I retrieved on entry into the function, overwriting my changes. I don't know if Mongoose/Mongo will not do the save if I have not changed that object, will have to try and see. Any more thoughts?
var User = Mongoose.model("User");
/* get the user, based on the session user id */
User.findById(session.me,function(err,user_info)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
if (!user_info || user_info.length === 0)
{
next(_e("ACCOUNT_NOT_FOUND"),"user_id: " + session.me);
return;
}
var source_service_info = _.where(user_info.credentials, {"source_service_id": service_id});
var source_service = source_service_info.source_service;
User.findByIdAndUpdate(session.me,{$pull: {"credentials": {"source_service_id": service_id}}},{},function(err,user_credential_removed)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
User.findByIdAndUpdate(session.me,{$pull: {"criteria": {"source_service": source_service}}},{},function(err,user_criteria_removed)
{
if (err)
{
next(err,user_info,null);
return;
}
else
{
next(null,user_criteria_removed);
}
});
});
});
};
The problem with your approach is that it just shortens the time during which the data could be read by a second process, it doesn't eliminate the problem.
The solution to this would be to set your semaphore in the same action as the read. I haven't used Mongoose, but in MongoDB you can use findAndModify to only return a User record if the semaphore is false, and if it is false, in one atomic operation, set the semaphore to true.
If you don't want to use findAndModify, you could first do an update that sets the semaphore true (or to some specific ID value so you know that it is YOUR semaphore) only if the semaphore is not set. Then, if that process succeeds, you could do the find (perhaps passing your semaphore ID as a criterion in the find). However, findAndModify, if it is available in Mongoose, would do that in one step.
A variation of that is described here: http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/isolate-sequence-of-operations/ where you do a form of optimistic locking that checks that the old values are unchanged before changing them to the new values.
There is a variation on this that uses a separate table to simulate a two-phase commit: http://docs.mongodb.org/manual/tutorial/perform-two-phase-commits/
Edited: Upon interchange below, this seems to be a schema and updating issue. Question may become something like: I have some entries in an array, and the ordinal index to those entries relates to some other arrays as well. How do I perform deletes without having mismatches?
Three off the top possibilities occur, depending on frequency in the real world vs QA test scenarios.
Consider adding a deleted flag but keeping the records in the same order. If someone toggles, reuse the same record, but fix however you want.
Use an associative array (JS object) for each element (not a feature from relational world.) If you need an order, add an array that lists the keys in order. Both have syntax to update without touching anything other that what has changed, and will not overwrite changes to different fields.
Use an associative array where the keys are numbers. Actual deletion won't hurt retrieval.
stuff = {}
stuff[1] = {some:'details'}
stuff[2] = {some:'details2'}
Was
1) Are you making changes to the same field? Make that into an array, and push changes, and pop the latest to read the current value.
2) Are you changing different fields, but data is getting trounced? Then there is better syntax to use for the updating. you can update field by field.
$set: { 'fielda': 'valuea' }
won't lose edits on previous fields
3) change your schema
4) change the timing on the processes so they don't overlap. Or so they do so in smaller subsets, that you can manage to prevent from overlapping.
I'd like to know, just out of interest, what multiple processes are needed to make updates on the same record? I don't work with anything that looks like that.
Is it possible to pass parameter to the search method programmatically in Yii?
I have tables Team and Workers and I create add workers to the team functionality. I want to show CGridView searching which will show all workers except those assigned to the actually editing team. How to achieve it?
Usually the gridview is calling the search() method of your model, you could easily edit this method to add an optional parameter like:
public function search($notLike = false){
if($notLike) {
//add the new sql condition not like
}
}
Just use
$criteria->addSearchCondition($column, $keyword, $escape, 'AND', $like)
For example
$criteria->addSearchCondition('CustomerName', 'Jo', false, 'AND', 'NOT LIKE')
// Column 'CustomerName'
// Value to look for 'Jo'
// escape value? false
// append to query using 'AND'
// Compare using Not Like
// This should generate: "... AND CustomerName LIKE 'Jo'"
Check out CDbCriteria->addSearchCondition()