Putting following line e.g. in app/controllers/application.js
console.log(document.location.host);
will not work, as the browser-context is not present.
What is the alternative? It should also work with other javascript objects.
solved: it was a structure error (novice)
import Ember from 'ember';
export default Ember.Controller.extend({
myInfo:'test',
i: console.log(document.location.host)
});
is working. Important is to put 'i:' or 'initialize:' on a freshly generated controller (after ember g controller app) as {} expects of course a js-hash-object and not a sequence of statements.
Solved. I just had to be aware that .extend(...) is not expecting code-statements per se, but a Mixin-class. So practically it needs a property-name (e.g. i or mySpecialInit syntactically followed by colon : and a function or here directly a statement console.log(document.location.host) ).
Related
I'm trying to pass an object from jade to ng-init in angular
This: doesn't work:
ng-init='tables=!{JSON.stringify(tables)}'
This: expands but,
ng-init='tables=#{JSON.stringify(tables)}'
the output is unescaped and filled with "s
ng-init="tables={"12":{"id":....
and the view isn't updated in either of the cases. This article implies that first one should work, but like I said, it doesn't even expand,
ng-init='tables=!{JSON.stringify(tables)}'
in source code shows up exactly the same in the HTML source
ng-init='tables=!{JSON.stringify(tables)}'
Actually, the #{...} approach seems to work fine.
It is probably the way console.log prints attributes' values that confused you.
ng-init="tables=#{JSON.stringify(tables)}"
Take a look at this short demo.
In what use-case you want to pass data directly from Jade to angular? I think you could to this job in controller like this :
$scope.init = function () {
// init stuff
}
...and in your view :
ng-init = init()
Using node-inspector, I'm unable to set breakpoint in the following node.js code. (Content of main.js)
(function() {
require('underscore');
var doSomething = function(callback) {
callback('doSomething Finished');
}
doSomething(function(x) {
console.log(x);
});
}).call(this);
I can easily set a breakpoint on line 2, line 4 or line 8, however no matter how hard I try the debugger won't let me set a break point on line 5 or line 9. To be clear, I'm using the following commands to run node-inspector
node --debug-brk main.js
node-inspector
I also tried to debug in web storm, however the issue persists. If I remove the line require('underscore');, then the problem immediately goes away and I'm able to set break point inside function body again. The problem also goes away if I remove the outermost closure function. It seems that the interaction between require and file level closure is screwing up the node debugging functionality. Has anyone experienced this problem themselves and / or knows any workarounds to be able to break inside function body?
EDIT: My node js version
Tony:~ $ node --version
v0.10.12
Tony:~ $
I ran exactly into the same issue with the same setup.
I've added a breakpoint after the definition of the target-function (that was the only place i could actually add a breakpoint). When the debugger reached that breakpoint and the function was actually defined, i was able to add breakpoints to the actual target-function...
This may not be the answer that you want to hear as it doesn't explain why you can't set any breakpoints, but I would simply remove your require statement from the closure and place it top-level. I would go even further and recommend that you don't use a closure like the one above at all.
The reason is that node uses its own module system, and unlike Javascript in the browser, declaring variables top-level does not pollute the global namespace. This is where require(...) comes in. So, you gain nothing by wrapping your code in an immediately invoked function (unless of course you want your module to be able to run both client side and server side).
I would guess that the reason that you are not able to set any breakpoints is that the V8 runtime is recognizing an unnecessary closure and then optimizing your code for you. The rewritten code may not have the correct source mapping and so breakpoints cannot be set.
So, two suggestions:
require calls are not like regular statements. They are more similar to import statements in Java and are handled specially by the compiler. They should always be top-level in a node file.
No need to wrap your code in an anonymous function when in Node.
Possibly doing something extremely stupid here but I can't find any documentation on what could be causing this.
Setting up a Vagrant VM using Puppet and I'm trying to override a specific setting within the mongodb module.
As far as I'm aware the README.md syntax is incorrect in that repo (Although I have tried that too).
My Manifest:
include mongodb
class { 'mongodb' :
port => '1111';
}
When running vagrant up I get the following Error:
Duplicate declaration: Class[Mongodb] is already declared; cannot redeclare at /tmp/vagrant-puppet/manifests/mongodb.pp:5 on node www
If I remove the configuration override it works perfectly but there's no reason why it doesn't.
You are using two notations to achieve the same, but you can only use parameters with the second notation. In short, you are declaring it twice.
So, just lose 'include mongodb' and you're good.
More info: http://docs.puppetlabs.com/puppet/2.7/reference/lang_classes.html#declaring-a-class-with-include
Yes, just simply remove include mongodb line. That will work, but make sure class { 'mongodb': ... } will still remain. Otherwise, use include mongodb
In Mojito on top of Node.js, I followed the example on http://developer.yahoo.com/cocktails/mojito/docs/quickstart/
What I did was renaming controller.server.js to controller.server-foo.js, and created a new file controller.server.js to show "Hello World".
But when mojito is started, the old file controller.server-foo.js is being used and so the "Hello World" is not printed. How come Mojito will use the old file?
(I also tried renaming controller.server-foo.js to foo-controller.server.js and now the "Hello World" is printed, but why is controller.server-foo.js used?)
I found out that historically, the "affinity" of the controller can be two parts. The first part is common, server, or client, and the second part is optional, and it might be tests, or other words, so use other names such as controller-not-used-server.js to disable it.
#Charles, there are 3 registration processes in mojito (yes, it is confusing at first):
Affinity (server, client or common).
YUI.add when creating yui modules (controllers, models, binders, etc)
and the less common which is the registration by name (which includes soemthing that we call selectors)
In your case, by having two controllers, one of them with a custom selector named "foo", you are effectible putting in use the 3 registration at once. Here is what happen internally:
A controller is always detonated as "controller" filename from the mojit folder, which is part of the registration by name, and since you have "foo" selector for one of the controller, your mojit will have to modes, "default" and "foo". Which one of them will be use? depends on the application.json, where you can have some conditions to set the value of "selector", which by default is empty. If you set the value of selector to "foo" when, for example, device is an iphone, then that controller will be used when that condition matches.
Then the YUI.add plays an important role, it is the way we can identify which controller should be used, and its only requirement is that NO OTHER MODULE in the app can have the same YUI Module name, which means that your controllers can't be named the same when registering them thru YUI.add. And I'm sure this is what is happening in your case. If they both have the same name under YUI.add() one will always override the other, and you should probably see that in the logs as a warning, if not, feel free to open an issue thru github.
To summarize:
The names used when registering YUI modules have to be unique, in your case, you can use: YUI.add('MyMojit', function(){}) and YUI.add('MyMojitFoo', function(){}), for each controller.
Use the selector (e.g.: controller.server-mobile.js) to select which YUI module should be used for a particular request by setting selector to the proper value in application.json.
I'm porting a Symfony 1.2 project to Symfony 2.x. I'm currently running the latest 2.1.0-dev release.
From my old project I have a class called Tools which has some simple functions for things like munging arrays into strings and generating slugs from strings. I'd like to use this class in my new project but I'm unclear how to use this class outside of a bundle.
I've looked at various answers here which recommend changing app/autoload.php but my autoload.php looks different to the ones in the answers, maybe something has changed here between 2.0 and 2.1.
I'd like to keep my class in my src or app directories as they're under source control. My vendors directory isn't as I'm using composer to take care of that.
Any advice would be appreciated here.
Another way is to use the /app/config/autoload.php:
<?php
use Doctrine\Common\Annotations\AnnotationRegistry;
$loader = require __DIR__.'/../vendor/autoload.php';
$loader->add( 'YOURNAMESPACE', __DIR__.'/../vendor/YOURVENDOR/src' );
// intl
if (!function_exists('intl_get_error_code')) {
require_once _DIR__.'/../vendor/symfony/symfony/src/Symfony/Component/Locale/Resources/stubs/functions.php';
$loader->add('', __DIR__.'/../vendor/symfony/symfony/src/Symfony/Component/Locale/Resources/stubs');
}
AnnotationRegistry::registerLoader(array($loader, 'loadClass'));
return $loader;
Just replace YOURNAMESPACE and YOURVENDOR with your values. Works quite well for me, so far.
You're correct, I stumbled upon the changes in autoload from 2.0 to 2.1. The above code works fine with the latest version, to which I upgraded my project ;-)
For a simple case like this the quickest solution is creating a folder (for example Common) directly under src and put your class in it.
src
-- Common
-- Tools.php
Tools.php contains your class with proper namespace, for example
<?php
namespace Common;
class Tools
{
public static function slugify($string)
{
// ...
}
}
Before calling your function do not forget the use statement
use Common\Tools;
// ...
Tools::slugify('my test string');
If you put your code under src following the proper folder structure and namespace as above, it will work without touching app/autoload.php.