I can not do such thing inside class definition:
let parametersForFeedRequest = "?fields=type,id,created_time,description&limit="+"\(self.postsPerScreen)"
but code like this:
let parametersForFeedRequest = "?fields=type,id,created_time,description&limit="+"\(25)"
compiling well. Why?
btw: parametersForFeedRequest is class value-member.
Here is the code in the class (moved from the comments):
class FbFeedViewController: UITableViewController, FBSDKLoginButtonDelegate {
#IBOutlet weak var menuButton:UIBarButtonItem!
let postsPerScreen = 25
let parametersForFeedRequest = "?fields=type,id,created_time,description&limit="+"\(self.postsPerScreen)"
}
self.postsPerScreen is not available at class instantiation time (because self isn't defined until the instance has been initialized). So, you can't define one property using the value of another. To get around this you have a few different choices:
You could assign parametersForFeedRequest in an initializer.
You can use the keyword lazy to set up a closure that will initialize your property the first time it is accessed:
lazy var parametersForFeedRequest: String = {return "?fields=type,id,created_time,description&limit="+"\(self.postsPerScreen)"}()
By the time you access the property, the instance will be initialized and self will be available. This will only initialize the property once.
You can define a computed property that will run each and every time you access the property:
var parametersForFeedRequest:String {return "?fields=type,id,created_time,description&limit="+"\(self.postsPerScreen)"}
Related
I have a class instance (in my case the class is URL), called req_url. URL has a property that has a setter for one of its properties (search) that is implemented in a way that is problematic for me (doesn't just set the given value but does something to it first).
How can I override that setter without creating a class that inherits from URL (and then create a different setter)?
defineProperty doesn't work since it works at the Object level. I want to to do it on that specific type level.
Whenever you have an instance whose setter you want to bypass, calling Object.defineProperty on the instance to set the property does work:
class Foo {
set prop(arg) {
console.log('setter invoked');
}
}
const f = new Foo();
Object.defineProperty(f, 'prop', { value: 'val' });
console.log(f.prop);
It won't affect any object, it'll only affect objects you explicitly call Object.defineProperty with. The collisions with other objects you seem to be worried about won't occur.
Another (stranger) option would be to delete the setter on the prototype, though if the class is used elsewhere, outside of your code, it could cause problems:
class Foo {
set prop(arg) {
console.log('setter invoked');
}
}
delete Foo.prototype.prop;
const f = new Foo();
f.prop = 'val';
console.log(f.prop);
How do we use 'inheritance' in Node.JS? I heard that prototype is similar to interfaces in java. But I have no idea how to use it!
Although there are various ways of performing inheritance and OO in javascript, in Node.js you would typically use the built in util.inherits function to create a constructor which inherits from another.
See http://book.mixu.net/ch6.html for a good discussion on this subject.
for example:
var util = require("util");
var events = require("events");
function MyOwnClass() {
// ... your code.
}
util.inherits(MyOwnClass, events.EventEmitter);
Creating an object constructor in pure JS:
They're just functions like any other JS function but invoked with the new keyword.
function Constructor(){ //constructors are typically capitalized
this.public = function(){ alert(private); }
var private = "Untouchable outside of this func scope.";
}
Constructor.static = function(){ alert('Callable as "Constructor.static()"'); }
var instance = new Constructor();
Inheritance:
function SubConstructor(){
this.anotherMethod(){ alert('nothing special'); }
}
function SubConstructor.prototype = new Constructor();
var instance = new SubConstructor();
instance.public(); //alerts that private string
The key difference is that prototypal inheritance comes from objects, rather than the things that build them.
One disadvantage is that there's no pretty way to write something that makes inheritance of instance vars like private possible.
The whopping gigantor mega-advantage, however, is that we can mess with the prototype without impacting the super constructor, changing a method or property for every object even after they've been built. This is rarely done in practice in higher-level code since it would make for an awfully confusing API but it can be handy for under-the-hood type stuff where you might want to share a changing value across a set of instances without just making it global.
The reason we get this post-instantiated behavior is because JS inheritance actually operates on a lookup process where any method call runs up the chain of instances and their constructor prototype properties until it finds the method called or quits. This can actually get slow if you go absolutely insane with cascading inheritance (which is widely regarded as an anti-pattern anyway).
I don't actually hit prototype specifically for inheritacne a lot myself, instead preferring to build up objects via a more composited approach but it's very handy when you need it and offers a lot of less obvious utility. For instance when you have an object that would be useful to you if only one property were different, but you don't want to touch the original.
var originInstance = {
originValue:'only on origin',
theOneProperty:'that would make this old object useful if it were different'
}
function Pseudoclone(){
this.theOneProperty = "which is now this value";
}
Pseudoclone.prototype = originInstance;
var newInstance = new Psuedoclone();
//accesses originInstance.originValue but its own theOneProperty
There are more modern convenience methods like Object.create but only function constructors give you the option to encapsulate private/instance vars so I tend to favor them since 9 times out of 10 anything not requiring encapsulation will just be an object literal anyway.
Overriding and Call Object Order:
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"undefined"
Note: the parens around the constructor allow it to be defined and evaluated in one spot so I could treat it like an object on the same line.
myMethod is alerting "undefined" because an externally overwritten method is defined outside of the constructor's closure which is what effective makes internal vars private-like. So you can replace the method but you won't have access to what it did.
Now let's do some commenting.
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
//instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"public referencing private"
and...
( function Constructor(){
var private = "public referencing private";
//this.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
} ).prototype = { myMethod:function(){ alert('prototype'); };
var instance = new Constructor();
//instance.myMethod = function(){ alert(private); }
instance.myMethod();//"prototype"
Note that prototype methods also don't have access to that internal private var for the same reason. It's all about whether something was defined in the constructor itself. Note that params passed to the constructor will also effectively be private instance vars which can be handy for doing things like overriding a set of default options.
Couple More Details
It's actually not necessary to use parens when invoking with new unless you have required parameters but I tend to leave them in out of habit (it works to think of them as functions that fire and then leave an object representing the scope of that firing behind) and figured it would be less alien to a Java dev than new Constructor;
Also, with any constructor that requires params, I like to add default values internally with something like:
var param = param || '';
That way you can pass the constructor into convenience methods like Node's util.inherit without undefined values breaking things for you.
Params are also effectively private persistent instance vars just like any var defined in a constructor.
Oh and object literals (objects defined with { key:'value' }) are probably best thought of as roughly equivalent to this:
var instance = new Object();
instance.key = 'value';
With a little help from Coffeescript, we can achieve it much easier.
For e.g.: to extend a class:
class Animal
constructor: (#name) ->
alive: ->
false
class Parrot extends Animal
constructor: ->
super("Parrot")
dead: ->
not #alive()
Static property:
class Animal
#find: (name) ->
Animal.find("Parrot")
Instance property:
class Animal
price: 5
sell: (customer) ->
animal = new Animal
animal.sell(new Customer)
I just take the sample code Classes in CoffeeScript. You can learn more about CoffeeScript at its official site: http://coffeescript.org/
I used the below to see how dart calls methods passed in to other methods to see what context the passed in method would/can be called under.
void main() {
var one = new IDable(1);
var two = new IDable(2);
print('one ${caller(one.getMyId)}'); //one 1
print('two ${caller(two.getMyId)}'); //two 2
print('one ${callerJustForThree(one.getMyId)}'); //NoSuchMethod Exception
}
class IDable{
int id;
IDable(this.id);
int getMyId(){
return id;
}
}
caller(fn){
return fn();
}
callerJustForThree(fn){
var three = new IDable(3);
three.fn();
}
So how does caller manager to call its argument fn without a context i.e. one.fn(), and why does callerJustForThree fail to call a passed in fn on an object which has that function defined for it?
In Dart there is a difference between an instance-method, declared as part of a class, and other functions (like closures and static functions).
Instance methods are the only ones (except for constructors) that can access this. Conceptually they are part of the class description and not the object. That is, when you do a method call o.foo() Dart first extracts the class-type of o. Then it searches for foo in the class description (recursively going through the super classes, if necessary). Finally it applies the found method with this set to o.
In addition to being able to invoke methods on objects (o.foo()) it is also possible to get a bound closure: o.foo (without the parenthesis for the invocation). However, and this is crucial, this form is just syntactic sugar for (<args>) => o.foo(<args>). That is, this just creates a fresh closure that captures o and redirects calls to it to the instance method.
This whole setup has several important consequences:
You can tear off instance methods and get a bound closure. The result of o.foo is automatically bound to o. No need to bind it yourself (but also no way to bind it to a different instance). This is way, in your example, one.getMyId works. You are actually getting the following closure: () => one.getMyId() instead.
It is not possible to add or remove methods to objects. You would need to change the class description and this is something that is (intentionally) not supported.
var f = o.foo; implies that you get a fresh closure all the time. This means that you cannot use this bound closure as a key in a hashtable. For example, register(o.foo) followed by unregister(o.foo) will most likely not work, because each o.foo will be different. You can easily see this by trying print(o.foo == o.foo).
You cannot transfer methods from one object to another. However you try to access instance methods, they will always be bound.
Looking at your examples:
print('one ${caller(one.getMyId)}'); //one 1
print('two ${caller(two.getMyId)}'); //two 2
print('one ${callerJustForThree(one.getMyId)}'); //NoSuchMethod Exception
These lines are equivalent to:
print('one ${caller(() => one.getMyId())}');
print('two ${caller(() => two.getMyId())}');
print('one ${callerJustForThree(() => one.getMyId())}';
Inside callerJustForThree:
callerJustForThree(fn){
var three = new IDable(3);
three.fn();
}
The given argument fn is completely ignored. When doing three.fn() in the last line Dart will find the class description of three (which is IDable) and then search for fn in it. Since it doesn't find one it will call the noSuchMethod fallback. The fn argument is ignored.
If you want to call an instance member depending on some argument you could rewrite the last example as follows:
main() {
...
callerJustForThree((o) => o.getMyId());
}
callerJustForThree(invokeIDableMember){
var three = new IDable(3);
invokeIDableMember(three);
}
I'll try to explain, which is not necessarily a strength of mine. If something I wrote isn't understandable, feel free to give me a shout.
Think of methods as normal objects, like every other variable, too.
When you call caller(one.getMyId), you aren't really passing a reference to the method of the class definition - you pass the method "object" specific for instance one.
In callerJustForThree, you pass the same method "object" of instance one. But you don't call it. Instead of calling the object fn in the scope if your method, you are calling the object fn of the instance three, which doesn't exist, because you didn't define it in the class.
Consider this code, using normal variables:
void main() {
var one = new IDable(1);
var two = new IDable(2);
caller(one.id);
caller(two.id);
callerJustForThree(one.id);
}
class IDable{
int id;
IDable(this.id);
}
caller(param){
print(param);
}
callerJustForThree(param){
var three = new IDable(3);
print(three.id); // This works
print(param); // This works, too
print(three.param); // But why should this work?
}
It's exactly the same concept. Think of your callbacks as normal variables, and everything makes sense. At least I hope so, if I explained it good enough.
I have a function,
public static IPagedResponse<T> GetPagedResponse<T, TAnon>(
this IQueryable<TAnon> query,
QueryableRequestMessage request)
where T : class
{
//...
}
I'm trying to pass query as an IQueryable of an anonymous type.
var query = _repository.All.Select(
i => new //anon type
{
i.Id,
i.Name,
}
);
var result = query.GetPagedResponse<EftInterfaceDto, ??????>(request);
The issue is I don't know what to put in place of ??????? It can't seem to infer it. And any combinations using .GetType() or typeof() I have tried, failed.
I tried changing the function to be IQueryable<dynamic> but that resulted in other errors, about dynamic not being allowed in Expression trees.
HACK:
I can make it work if I change my function to this:
public static IPagedResponse<T> GetPagedResponse<T, TAnon>(
this IQueryable<TAnon> query,
QueryableRequestMessage request,
T typeSample)
where T : class
{
//...
}
And then pass in an instance of T
var result = query.GetPagedResponse(request, new SomeClassOfT());
This way, I can use type inference to determine the anonymous type TAnon, and don't need to be explicit in the call to the generic (no <types> required).
However, I don't want to do this, as it's clearly not clear what I'm doing.
This is how I used to utilize inheritance in Entity Framework (POCO):
ctx.Animals // base class instances (all instances)
ctx.Animals.OfType<Cat> // inherited class Cat's instances only
ctx.Animals.OfType<Dog> // inherited class Dog's instances only
This is the only similar way I found in MongoDb (MongoDb reference):
var query = Query.EQ("_t", "Cat");
var cursor = collection.FindAs<Animal>(query);
Note in the latter case I have to deal with discriminator ("_t") and hardcode my class name, that is not quite convenient and looks awful. If I miss the query I got an exception on enumeration attempt. Have I missed something? My suggestion was the document Db which stores objects 'as is' should handle inheritance easily.
Assuming your discriminators are functioning (_t is stored correctly for each document) then I think this is what you are looking for.
var results = collection.AsQueryable<Animal>().OfType<Cat>
Returns only those documents that are of type 'Cat'.
Well, a document db does in fact store objects "as is" - i.e. without the notion of objects belonging to some particular class. That's why you need _t when you want the deserializer to know which subclass to instantiate.
In your case, I suggest you come up with a discriminator for each subclass, instead of relying on the class name. This way, you can rename classes etc. without worrying about a hardcoded string somewhere.
You could do something like this:
public abstract class SomeBaseClass
{
public const string FirstSubClass = "first";
public const string SecondSubClass = "second";
}
[BsonDiscriminator(SomeBaseClass.FirstSubClass)]
public class FirstSubClass { ... }
and then
var entireCollection = db.GetCollection<FirstSubClass>("coll");
var subs = entireCollection.Find(Query.Eq("_t", SomeBaseClass.FirstSubClass));
From your link:
The one case where you must call RegisterClassMap yourself (even without arguments) is when you are using a polymorphic class hierarchy: in this case you must register all the known subclasses to guarantee that the discriminators get registered.
Register class maps for your base class and each one of your derived classes:
BsonClassMap.RegisterClassMap<Animal>();
BsonClassMap.RegisterClassMap<Cat>();
BsonClassMap.RegisterClassMap<Dog>();
Make sure that your collection is of type of your base class:
collection = db.GetCollection<Animal>("Animals");
Find using your query. The conversion to the corresponding child class is done automatically:
var query = Query.EQ("_t", "Cat");
var cursor = collection.Find(query);
If the only concern is hardcoding class name, you can do something like this:
collection = db.GetCollection<Animal>("Animals");
var query = Query.EQ("_t", typeof(Cat).Name);
var cursor = collection.Find(query);
Take a look on the documentation
http://docs.mongodb.org/ecosystem/tutorial/serialize-documents-with-the-csharp-driver/#scalar-and-hierarchical-discriminators
The main reason you might choose to use hierarchical discriminators is because it makes it possibly to query for all instances of any class in the hierarchy. For example, to read all the Cat documents we can write:
var query = Query.EQ("_t", "Cat");
var cursor = collection.FindAs<Animal>(query);
foreach (var cat in cursor) {
// process cat
}