I'm trying to work with shadow roots in my Testcafe project. It's a little bit complicated to deal with it. I create a custom function that behaves the same as Selector().find() but I struggle with this error :
The "boundTestRun" option value is expected to be a test controller.
when I'm doing as documented here :
import { Selector, t } from 'testcafe'
getInShadowRoot = Selector(
// More code here
)
const boundedGetInShadowRoot = this.getInShadowRoot.with({ boundTestRun: t })
I create a gist to illustrate my problem: https://gist.github.com/HugoDel/a600f3e120674e3f255884f3dc84fee3
Thanks for your help!
Edit:
I finally get rid of it since I don't need to add .with({ boundTestRun: t }) to make it work.
Related
I've recently been getting into Haxe and just started to use HaxeFlixel to load a Tiled .TMX file.
I am creating a TiledMap object and passing it the TMX file path, then I want to iterate over the layers in that object to add them to the game scene. However when I try to access .tileArray (which is a property of TiledTileLayer) I get the following error :-
flixel.addons.editors.tiled.TiledLayer has no field tileArray
Here is the code:
package;
import flixel.FlxState;
import flixel.tile.FlxTilemap;
import flixel.addons.editors.tiled.TiledMap;
import openfl.Assets;
class PlayState extends FlxState
{
private var _tiled_map:TiledMap;
override public function create():Void
{
_tiled_map = new TiledMap("assets/data/Map1.tmx");
for(layer in _tiled_map.layers){
var layerData:Array<Int> = layer.tileArray;
}
super.create();
}
override public function update(elapsed:Float):Void
{
super.update(elapsed);
}
}
I've found the following example - http://coinflipstudios.com/devblog/?p=182 which seems to work fine for people.
So I wanted to check whether the layer object was a TiledTileLayer as it should be, or TiledLayer, with the following:
trace(Type.typeof(layer));
Which sure enough yields:
PlayState.hx:24: TClass([class TiledTileLayer])
So if it is a TiledTileLayer which has the field tileArray why is it moaning?
I had a look at the source code (https://github.com/HaxeFlixel/flixel-addons/blob/dev/flixel/addons/editors/tiled/TiledMap.hx#L135) and TiledTileLayer inherits from TiledLayer. Layers is an array of type TiledLayer, so I think this is why it is moaning. I can clearly see that the array is storing child objects of TiledLayer, but as soon as I access any props/methods of those children, it complains that the parent does not have that field? Very confusing!
To run I'm using this command: C:\HaxeToolkit\haxe\haxelib.exe run lime test flash -debug -Dfdb
Thank you!
So if it is a TiledTileLayer which has the field tileArray why is it moaning?
It may be a TiledTileLayer in this case, but that may not always be the case. layers is an Array<TileLayer> after all, so it could be a TiledObjectLayer or a TiledImageLayer as well (which don't have a tileArray field). This can nicely be seen in the code you linked. The concrete type can only be known at runtime, but the error you get happens at compile-time.
If you know for sure there won't be any object or image layers, you can just cast it to a TiledTileLayer. However, just to be safe, it's good practice to check the type beforehand anyway:
for (layer in _tiled_map.layers) {
if (Std.is(layer, TiledTileLayer)) {
var tileLayer:TiledTileLayer = cast layer;
var layerData:Array<Int> = tileLayer.tileArray;
}
}
It works without this for the tutorial you linked because it was made for an older version of flixel-addons.
I am building an Angular application with typescript, where I would like to display the force directed network graph from Mike Boston build with d3 shown here.
I have copied and translated most of the code to type script without trouble but the line
. force("link", d3.forceLink().id(function(d) { return d.id; }))
fails with the error {} has no property id.
Only the following lines referring to d.source.x works fine?
I have installed d3 with npm and also types/d3 but still no luck, even though the typings.d.ts has an interface defining the id.
Thank you for your help!
Maybe that is something related to versioning, if you are using TypeScript 2.4.1, try to downgrade to 2.3.4 and give it a go.
As a workaround you could use any:
const forceLink: any = d3.forceLink();
. force("link", forceLink.id(function(d) { return d.id; }))
The example given at http://plnkr.co/edit/qcESHb3cCwD6NZL1yuhX?p=preview helped me, with focus on code shown here:
this.simulation = d3.forceSimulation()
.force("link", d3.forceLink().id(function(d) { return d.id; }))
.force("charge", d3.forceManyBody())
.force("center", d3.forceCenter(width / 2, height / 2));
this.render(miserables);
This is the best rendition I have seen. Works for me.
I'm having an issue, I did a Little application a few months ago in angular, but in order to extend my knowledge about angular I decide to add a funcionality and complexity to my code.
So no I inject the module and the controller and I use app config and ng-route.
Now I have something like this:
var app = angular.module('myApp',['ngRoute']);
app.config(appConfig);
app.controller('TestController', ['$http', TestController])
function appConfig($routeProvider){
$routeProvider.when('/', {
templateUrl: './test.html',
controller: 'TestController',
controllerAs: 'my'
});
}
function TestController($http ) {
this.statusForm = 'Incompleto';
a();
}
function a(){
statusForm='Finalizado';
¿HOW DO I ACCES STATUSFORM TO CHANGE ITS VALUE IN TestController?
}
So that's my question, how do I change from a private function called inside the cotroller without $scope.
Is there anyway to refer the testcontroller function's scope?
Finally I found an answer to my question. I feel a bit of shame because the answer is a bit simple. I should figured it out much sooner and easier than I did.
Ok, I'm explaining it, originally i had this:
function TestController($http ) {
this.statusForm = 'Incompleto';
a();
}
function a(){
statusForm='Finalizado';
¿HOW DO I ACCES STATUSFORM TO CHANGE ITS VALUE IN TestController?
}
And the problema was that statusform was not accesiblo at function a, before when it was using $scope it was accesible.
function TestController($http ) {
this.statusForm = 'Incompleto';
a(**this**);
}
function a(**padre**){
**padre**.statusForm='Finalizado';
}
So I've changed it this way(see changes between **) and now it Works. I thought i would have some angulars way to not to send the parameter to the function "a", but i didn't find any.
Any way this way Works.
If anyone has ever the same doubt i hope this help. Greetings.
The code below works fine in development. I get the number (#key) appended to my class 'step' to produce...'step0, step1, step2, ...) but it does not work in production. Any suggestions on how to get this to work in production?
{{#careers}}
<div class="col-sm-{{{../size}}} emp text-center"><span class="emp-role">{{this}}</span><span class="step{{#key}}"></span></div>
{{/careers}}
The overall goal was to produce numbered 'step' classes.
I then had some css to handle step0, step1, step2 and step3.
.step0 {
...
}
.step1 {
...
}
.step2 {
...
}
I tried to do this with an nth-child() but couldn't get it work work.
I was using {{#key}} when I should have been using {{#index}}.
Answer found here.
I'm trying to create a small EmberJS application, but I'm struggling about how to architecture it correctly. I have a main view called "library" which displays on a sidebar a list of folders. User can click on each folder and display the content at the center (while the sidebar is still active).
I therefore have a library resource, and nested resources to display the folders in this specific context:
this.resource('library', function() {
this.resource('libraryFolders', {path: 'folders'}, function() {
this.resource('libraryFolder', {path: ':folder_id'};
}
};
To be able to access the folders in the parent root, I set up a dependency:
App.LibraryController = Ember.Controller.extend({
needs: ["libraryFolders"],
folders: null,
foldersBinding: "controllers.libraryFolders"
});
App.LibraryRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
controller.set('controllers.libraryFolders.model', App.Folder.find());
}
});
First question: is this a good way? I feel it a bit strange that a parent controller have a dependency to its children.
Now, another problem arises: what if I want to reuse folders in another context? All the methods I would write in LibraryFoldersController would be specific to this one, not really DRY. What I came up is adding a root "folders" resource, and add the dependency to this one instead:
this.resources('folders');
App.LibraryController = Ember.Controller.extend({
needs: ["Folders"],
folders: null,
foldersBinding: "controllers.folders"
});
App.LibraryRoute = Ember.Route.extend({
setupController: function(controller) {
controller.set('controllers.folders.model', App.Folder.find());
}
});
What do you think? Am I doing it wrong?
IMO it looks good so far. You are using the needs API which is the correct (ember) way to setup dependencies between controllers.
Maybe if you find yourself writing repeating code you could consider creating a Mixin for a more general controller an put there your logic, that should be agnostic to the use cases it handles.
For example defined a mixin:
App.ControllerMixin = Ember.Mixin.create({
// "use case" agnostic logic here
});
You mix mixins into classes by passing them as the first arguments to .extend.
App.LibraryController = Ember.ObjectController.extend(App.ControllerMixin, {
// now you can use here the logic defined in your mixin
// and add custom code as you please
});
Another possibility is to write a super class and then extend from it to inherit common logic:
Snippet taken from the docs:
App.Person = Ember.Object.extend({
helloWorld: function() {
alert("Hi, my name is " + this.get('name'));
}
});
var tom = App.Person.create({
name: 'Tom Dale'
});
tom.helloWorld(); // alerts "Hi, my name is Tom Dale".
One thing worth mentioning (though I think it's simply a typo) is: needs: ["Folders"] should be needs: ["folders"],
Hope it helps.