i am using below code...but if Status is Empty iss show below result in database...i want to remove if Status is Empty ..
1 Address {}, Status {} save in database.
function CheckStatus(oldJob, newJob) {
var obj = {};
if(newJob && newJob.Status) {
obj.Status= {};
if (oldJob.Status.total !== newJob.Status.total) {
obj.Status.total = newJob.Status.total;
}
if (oldJob.Status.charge_description && oldJob.Status.charge_description !== newJob.Status.charge_description) {
obj.Status.charge_description = newJob.Status.charge_description;
}
}
}
Mongodb
"Job" : {
"_id" : ObjectId("5873b352e7621d08fccc5890"),
"updated_by" : "",
"details" : "{\"current_status\":\"Completed\",\"address\":{},\"Status\":{}}",
"changetype" : "Update",
"datetime" : ISODate("2017-01-09T15:59:14.202Z")
},
please help how what enter in If Condition ( below code not working)
if(obj.address = '{}')
{
console.log('Empty');
}
Setting an object's value to undefined essentially deletes them. You may use the undefined keyword easily as such:
newJob.address = undefined;
How i would check for an empty object and delete its content:
if(Object.keys(newJob.address).length === 0 && obj.constructor === Object){
newJob.address = undefined;
}
Solution is better explained in this question's answers:
How do I test for an empty JavaScript object?
Related
I want to remove multiple elements from my Firestore array:
var eliminatedThisRound = []
for (const player in players){
if (players[player].eliminated === false && players[player].answer !== answer) {
eliminatedThisRound.push(players[player].uid);
}
}
var update = {
roundFinished: true,
nextRound: date.valueOf() + 12000,seconds
players: updatedPlayers,
remainingPlayers: admin.firestore.FieldValue.arrayRemove(eliminatedThisRound)
}
await t.update(gameRef, update);
The above returns this error:
transaction failure: Error: Element at index 0 is not a valid array element. Nested arrays are not supported.
So it would be fine if I knew the values, as I could do something like this:
remainingPlayers: admin.firestore.FieldValue.arrayRemove("player1", "player2")
However I haven't found a way to make the parameter of arrayRemove() dynamic.
Any idea?
You need to use the Spread operator, as follows, in order to pass all elements of eliminatedThisRound as arguments to the arrayRemove() method.
var eliminatedThisRound = []
for (const player in players){
if (players[player].eliminated === false && players[player].answer !== answer) {
eliminatedThisRound.push(players[player].uid);
}
}
var update = {
// ...
admin.firestore.FieldValue.arrayRemove(...eliminatedThisRound)
}
await t.update(gameRef, update);
Note that you should have at least one element in the Array, otherwise you will call arrayRemove() with 0 argument while it requires at least 1 argument. So you may check the array length before assigning the remainingPlayers property to the update Object.
You can pass a single value or an array of values from variables like this to arrayRemove():
var removingPlayersId = ['player1', 'player2'];
admin
.firestore()
.doc('game/someID')
.set(
{
remainingPlayers: admin.firestore.FieldValue.arrayRemove(
removingPlayersId
),
},
{ merge: true }
);
I'm trying to put a JSON object "Synced" (Which you will see in the code)
This is the code for a function "addServer(userid, serverid)"
The function is being required from another javascript file
db.all(`SELECT * FROM Users WHERE Tag = ? LIMIT 1`, userid, async(error,element) => {
if(element[0].Synced === '') {
var sJSON = {
users:{
[userid]:4,
},
servers:[`${serverid}`]
}
var serverJSON = JSON.stringify(sJSON)
console.log(serverJSON)
} else {
//Else statement not done yet
}
db.run(`UPDATE Users SET Synced = "${serverJSON}" WHERE Tag = "${userid}"`)
})
Solved. Needed to change quoting.
As Dave Newton said, I had to check my quoting. What I did was change my double quotes to single quotes which solved the problem.
I'm trying to get some info out of a API call in Nodejs, structured something like a JSON:
{
"generated":"2019-11-04T09:34:11+00:00",
"event":{
"id":"19040956",
"start_":"2019-11-16T11:30:00+00:00",
"event_context":{
"sport":{
"id":"1",
"name":"Soccer"
}
}
}
}
I'm not sure about the presence of none of these fields(Json could be incomplete).
Is there a better way to get the value of "name" in JSON.event.event_context.sport.name without an ugly if to not get errors like "cannot get field 'sport' of undefined"?
Currently, I'm doing
if(json.event && json.event.event_context && json.event.event_context.sport) {
return json.event.event_context.sport.name;
}
Is there a better way?
Thank you!
what do you mean by saying "I'm not sure about the presence of none of these fields"?
i don't understand what your'e trying to achieve.
Looks like there is also an interesting package that will allow more conditions on searching json :
https://www.npmjs.com/package/jspath
let getNested = (path, obj) => {
return path.split(".").reduce( getPath, obj);
}
let getPath = (path, key) => {
return (path && path[key]) ? path[key] : null
}
let test = {
"foo": "bar",
"baz": { "one": 1, "two": ["to", "too", "two"] },
"event": { "event_context": { "sport": { "name": "soccer" } } }
}
console.log(getNested("none", test))
console.log(getNested("baz.one", test))
console.log(getNested("baz.two", test))
console.log(getNested("event.event_context.sport.name", test))
You can use lodash get to get a potentially deeply-nested value, and also specify a default in case it doesnt exist.
Example
const _ = require('lodash');
const my_object = {
"generated":"2019-11-04T09:34:11+00:00",
"event":{
"id":"19040956",
"start_":"2019-11-16T11:30:00+00:00",
"event_context":{
"sport":{
"id":"1",
"name":"Soccer"
}
}
};
_.get(my_object, 'event.event_context.sport.name'); // "Soccer"
_.get(my_object, 'event.event_context.sport.nonExistentField', 'default val'); // "default val"
Article: https://medium.com/#appi2393/lodash-get-or-result-f409e73e018b
You can check by using a function to check object keys like :
function checkProperty(checkObject, checkstring){
if(!checkstring)
return false;
var propertiesKeys = checkstring.split('.');
propertiesKeys.forEach(element => {
if(!checkObject|| !checkObject.hasOwnProperty(element)){
return false;
} else {
checkObject= checkObject[element];
}
})
return true;
};
var objectToCheck = {
"generated":"2019-11-04T09:34:11+00:00",
"event":{
"id":"19040956",
"start_":"2019-11-16T11:30:00+00:00",
"event_context":{
"sport":{
"id":"1",
"name":"Soccer"
}
}
}
}
if (checkProperty(objectToCheck ,'event.event_context.sport.name'))
console.log('object to find is : ', objectToCheck .event.event_context.sport.name;)
Yeah there are better ways!
For example, you could use lodash's get() method to reach a nested value.
var object = { 'a': [{ 'b': { 'c': 3 } }] };
_.get(object, 'a[0].b.c');
// => 3
But there is also a native solution.
Currently (11.2019) only Babel can handle this.
I am speaking of Optional chaining. It's new in the Ecmascript world.
Why I like it? Look here!
// Still checks for errors and is much more readable.
const nameLength = db?.user?.name?.length;
What happens when db, user, or name is undefined or null? With the optional chaining operator, JavaScript initializes nameLength to undefined instead of throwing an error.
If you are using Babel as a compiler then you could use it now.
Related link: https://v8.dev/features/optional-chaining
I found an important security fault in my meteor app regarding subscriptions (maybe methods are also affected by this).
Even though I use the check package and check() assuring that the correct parameters data types are received inside the publication, I have realised that if a user maliciously subscribes to that subscription with wrong parameter data types it is affecting all other users that are using the same subscription because the meteor server is not running the publication while the malicious user is using incorrect parameters.
How can I prevent this?
Packages used:
aldeed:collection2-core#2.0.1
audit-argument-checks#1.0.7
mdg:validated-method
and npm
import { check, Match } from 'meteor/check';
Server side:
Meteor.publish('postersPub', function postersPub(params) {
check(params, {
size: String,
section: String,
});
return Posters.find({
section: params.section,
size: params.size === 'large' ? 'large' : 'small',
}, {
// fields: { ... }
// sort: { ... }
});
});
Client side:
// in the template:
Meteor.subscribe('postersPub', { size: 'large', section: 'movies' });
// Malicious user in the browser console:
Meteor.subscribe('postersPub', { size: undefined, section: '' });
Problem: The malicious user subscription is preventing all other users of getting answer from their postersPub subscriptions.
Extra note: I've also tried wrapping the check block AND the whole publication with a try catch and it doesn't change the effect. The error disappears from the server console, but the other users keep being affected and not getting data from the subscription that the malicious user is affecting.
Check method and empty strings
There is one thing to know about check and strings which is, that it accepts empty strings like '' which you basically showed in your malicious example.
Without guarantee to solve your publication issue I can at least suggest you to modify your check code and include a check for non-empty Strings.
A possible approach could be:
import { check, Match } from 'meteor/check';
const nonEmptyString = Match.Where(str => typeof str === 'string' && str.length > 0);
which then can be used in check like so:
check(params, {
size: nonEmptyString,
section: nonEmptyString,
});
Even more strict checks
You may be even stricter with accepted parameters and reduce them to a subset of valid entries. For example:
const sizes = ['large', 'small'];
const nonEmptyString = str => typeof str === 'string' && str.length > 0;
const validSize = str => nonEmptyString(str) && sizes.indexOf( str) > -1;
check(params, {
size: Match.Where(validSize),
section: Match.Where(nonEmptyString),
});
Note, that this also helps you to avoid query logic based on the parameter. You can change the following code
const posters = Posters.find({
section: params.section,
size: params.size === 'large' ? 'large' : 'small',
}, {
// fields: { ... }
// sort: { ... }
});
to
const posters = Posters.find({
section: params.section,
size: params.size,
}, {
// fields: { ... }
// sort: { ... }
});
because the method does anyway accept only one of large or small as parameters.
Fallback on undefined cursors in publications
Another pattern that can support you preventing publication errors is to call this.ready() if the collection returned no cursor (for whatever reason, better is to write good tests to prevent you from these cases).
const posters = Posters.find({
section: params.section,
size: params.size === 'large' ? 'large' : 'small',
}, {
// fields: { ... }
// sort: { ... }
});
// if we have a cursor with count
if (posters && posters.count && posters.count() >= 0)
return posters;
// else signal the subscription
// that we are ready
this.ready();
Combined code example
Applying all of the above mentioned pattern would make your function look like this:
import { check, Match } from 'meteor/check';
const sizes = ['large', 'small'];
const nonEmptyString = str => typeof str === 'string' && str.length > 0;
const validSize = str => nonEmptyString(str) && sizes.indexOf( str) > -1;
Meteor.publish('postersPub', function postersPub(params) {
check(params, {
size: Match.Where(validSize),
section: Match.Where(nonEmptyString),
});
const posters = Posters.find({
section: params.section,
size: params.size,
}, {
// fields: { ... }
// sort: { ... }
});
// if we have a cursor with count
if (posters && posters.count && posters.count() >= 0)
return posters;
// else signal the subscription
// that we are ready
this.ready();
});
Summary
I for myself found that with good check matches and this.ready() the problems with publications have been reduced to a minimum in my applications.
I can pass values for select, text box and etc but not for multi select. I can update values for multi select. But i can't create a record by passing values for multi select.
This is the code :
$datastring = array(
"gu_action"=> "create",
"recordtype"=>"vendor",
"companyname"=>"Jerald Vend",
'subsidiary'=>1,
'custentity36'=>1
);
custentity36 is multiselect control. It's label is Course
when i pass single value , It works fine.
when i try to pass multiple values for multi select like the below code , i am getting error like "Please enter value(s) for: Course"
$datastring = array(
"gu_action"=> "create",
"recordtype"=>"vendor",
"companyname"=>"Jerald Vend",
'subsidiary'=>1,
'custentity36'=>array(1,3)
);
The Code is : https://gist.githubusercontent.com/ganeshprabhus/a3ebd67712913df3de29/raw/3a6df6a3af8642fceacb3a4b8e519ad96a054e69/ns_script.js
The value you pass is in correct format. In this case the RESTlet code should have the compatibility of handling the multiselect filed. The field set value api that used in the RESTlet should be
nlapiSetFieldValues()
This is the api can be used to set multiselect field value. As per the github refernce you shared. under the create_record function
/********************** Creation *********************************/
function create_record(datain) {
var err = new Object();
// Validate if mandatory record type is set in the request
if (!datain.recordtype) {
err.status = "Failed";
err.message = "Missing recordtype";
return err;
}
var record = nlapiCreateRecord(datain.recordtype);
for ( var fieldname in datain) {
if (datain.hasOwnProperty(fieldname)) {
if (fieldname != 'recordtype' && fieldname != 'id') {
var value = datain[fieldname];
// ignore other type of parameters
if (value && typeof value != 'object') {
record.setFieldValue(fieldname, value);
}
} //recordtype and id checking ends
}
} //for ends
var recordId = nlapiSubmitRecord(record);
nlapiLogExecution('DEBUG', 'id=' + recordId);
var nlobj = nlapiLoadRecord(datain.recordtype, recordId);
return nlobj;
}
The quoted code should be
record.setFieldValues(fieldname,value) // fieldname : custentity36 , value : 1,3