I am creating a folderish type (archetype 1) and I want to have possibility to add only a single object of (archetype 2) to this folder.
You can restrict the addable types inside your folderish type ("archetype 1") to "archetype 2" by amending the "archetypes 1" types definition (profiles/default/archetype1.xml):
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<object name="archetype1">
...
<property name="filter_content_types">True</property>
<property name="allowed_content_types">
<element value="archetype2" />
</property>
...
</object>
Ok, so you want your second type archetype 2 to be addable only once inside archetype 1?
I would do it in such a way that the Add New dropdown on the green edit bar only shows archetype 2 if it can be added (the other solutions here require the user to first render the add form and then be told that this is not allowed).
You need to make sure that your folderish archetype 1 subclasses ConstrainTypesMixin.
I think if you use the folderish content types in Products.ATContentTypes you will automatically subclass this mixin class, but it helps to make sure.
Then, inside archetype 1, add the method: getLocallyAllowedTypes. This method is declared in the ConstrainTypesMixin class in Products/ATContentTypes/lib/constraintypes.py
In this method you can now add the logic to check if an instance of archetype 2 has already been added. If it has, don't return it as one of the locally allowed types. If it hasn't, then return it (with the other types if they exist).
Make sure to first call super() in this method to get the locally added types from the superclass's method.
To understand how this works, you can look at the *_addableTypesInContext* method in the FactoriesSubMenuItem class in plone/app/contentmenu/menu.py to see when and how this getLocallyAllowedTypes method is called.
You are probably best off creating a custom add form (perhaps using z3c.form) and making the placing the restriction there.
You can override the createObject.cpy script and add a check there:
this_type = REQUEST.form.get('type_name')
if this_type == 'MyATContentType':
# MyATContentType needs a special check
ctool = getToolByName(context, 'portal_catalog')
this_path = '/'.join(context.getPhysicalPath())
# Query the Catalog to see we already have an instance of this object here
results = ctool.searchResults({'portal_type': this_type, 'path': this_path})
if results:
context.plone_utils.addPortalMessage(_(
u'Sorry, but there already is an object of type %s here.' % this_type
))
# Redirect to the edit form of the first found object.
cv = results[0]
cv_path = cv.getPath()
return context.REQUEST.RESPONSE.redirect(cv_path + "/edit")
Provide the customized script, together with the associated .metadata file, in the skins/templates folder of your product.
Bonus tip: In Dexterity, you would add this check in dexterity.AddForm.update()
Related
Context: I'm implementing a Jenkins Pipeline. For this, in order to define the pipeline's parameters I implemented the DSL file.
In the DSL file, I have a parameter of ActiveChoiceParam type, called ORDERS. This parameter will allow me to choose one or more orders numbers at the same time.
Problem: What I want to do is to set the values that gets rendered for ORDERS parameter from a custom library. Basically I have a directory my_libraries with a file, orders.groovy. In this file, there is an order class, with a references list property that contains my values.
The code in the DSL file is as follows:
def order = new my_libraries.order()
pipelineJob("111_name_of_pipeline") {
description("pipeline_description")
keepDependencies(false)
parameters {
stringParam("BRANCH", "master", "The branch")
activeChoiceParam("ORDERS") {
description("orders references")
choiceType('CHECKBOX')
groovyScript{
script("return order.references")
fallbackScript("return ['error']")
}
}
}
}
Also, is good to mention that my custom library works well. For example, if I choose to use a ChoiceParam as below, it works, but of course, is not the behaviour I want. I want to select multiple choices.
choiceParam("ORDERS", order.references, "Orders references list but single-choice")
How can I make order.references available in the script part of groovyScript?
I've tried using global instance of order class, instantiate the class directly in the groovyScript, but no positive result.
I'm trying to check if a certain node type has a property
without actually needing to make an instance of it
like this:
print("z_index" in Position2D);
Classes in ClassDB
If we are talking about a build-in class (not a custom class that you created, but one that is part of Godot), you can use ClassDB to get the property:
var properties := ClassDB.class_get_property_list("Position2D")
Classes from Godot Scripts
If the class is not in ClassDB (which is the case custom classes), but you have the script, you can use the script to get the property list:
var properties := preload("res://custom_class.gd").get_script_property_list()
If you don't have the script, perhaps you can find it. This code uses the hidden project setting "_global_script_classes" to find the path of the script for a class given the name_of_class you are looking for, and loads it:
if ProjectSettings.has_setting("_global_script_classes"):
for x in ProjectSettings.get_setting("_global_script_classes"):
if x.class == name_of_class:
return load(x.path)
Addendum: This is no longer available in Godot 4.
Other classes
However, the above approach will not work for every type of script. In those cases, I'm afraid the best way is to instance it. You can still get the properties from the instance and cache them (perhaps put them in a dictionary) so that you are not creating a new instance every time you need to query:
var properties := (CustomClass.new()).get_property_list()
Query the properties
Regardless of how you got the property list, you can query them the same way. For example this code looks for a property with name "z_index" and gets its type:
var found := false
var type := TYPE_NIL
for property in properties:
if property.name == "z_index":
found = true
type = property.type
break
prints(found, type)
The type is a Variant.Type constant.
Theraot's answer is correct, since it provides a way to check attributes without creating an instance of a node/gdscript.
You can also check the properties of an existing instance of a node/scene by doing this:
if "attribute_name" in thing:
pass # do stuff here
Practical example; During a signal triggered by two Area2Ds colliding, check if one node's attribute item_type is set:
func _on_area_2d_area_entered(area):
if "item_type" in area:
print(area["item_type"])
Suppose I define "Class original:" and create a class attribute "one = 4." Then I create an instance of the class "First = original()." My understanding is that First now contains a pointer to original and "First.one" will return "4." However, suppose I create "Second = original()" and then set "Second.one = 5." What exactly happens in memory? Does a new copy of Class original get created with a class attribute of 5?
I've created a Class original with class attribute one. I then created two instances of this class (First and Second) and verified that id(First.one) and id(Second.one) are pointing to the same place. They both return the same address. However, when I created Third=original() and set Third.one = 5 and then check id(Thrid.one) it appears to be pointing somewhere else. Where is it pointing and what happened? When I check original.one it still returns "4" so obviously the original object is not being modified. Thanks.
It appears you are asking about a piece of code similar to this:
class Original:
def __init__(self, n):
self.one = n
first = Original(4)
second = Original(4)
third = Original(5)
print(id(first.one))
# 140570468047360
print(id(second.one))
# 140570468047360
print(id(third.one))
# 140570468047336
Suppose I define "Class original:" and create a class attribute "one = 4." Then I create an instance of the class "First = original()." My understanding is that First now contains a pointer to original
No. The variable references the instance you created, not the class. If it referenced the class, there would be no way for you to get at the instance you just created.
The instance will, somewhere in its object header, of course contain a pointer to its class. Without that pointer, method lookup wouldn't be possible, since you wouldn't be able to find the class from the instance.
and "First.one" will return "4."
Yes. The attribute one of first contains a pointer to the object 4 (which is an instance of the class int).
[Note that technically, some Python implementations will perform an optimization and actually store the object 4 directly in the attribute instead of a pointer to the object. But that is an internal implementation detail.]
However, suppose I create "Second = original()" and then set "Second.one = 5." What exactly happens in memory? Does a new copy of Class original get created with a class attribute of 5?
No. Why would you need a separate copy of the class? The methods are still the same for both instances. In fact, that is precisely the reason why methods in Python take the instance as their first argument! That way, there need only be one method. (This is actually the same in every OO language, except that in most other languages, this argument is "invisible" and only accessible using a special keyword like self in Ruby, Smalltalk, Self, and Newspeak or this in Java, C#, and Scala.)
I've created a Class original with class attribute one. I then created two instances of this class (First and Second) and verified that id(First.one) and id(Second.one) are pointing to the same place. They both return the same address. However, when I created Third=original() and set Third.one = 5 and then check id(Thrid.one) it appears to be pointing somewhere else.
It is not quite clear to me what your question is here. first.one and second.one both point to 4, so they both point to the same ID since they both point to the same object. third.one points to 5, which is obviously a different object from 4, so naturally, it has a different ID.
It is, in fact, one of the requirement of IDs that different objects that exist at the same time must have different IDs.
Where is it pointing and what happened?
Again, it is not quite clear what you are asking.
It is pointing at 5, and nothing happened.
When I check original.one it still returns "4" so obviously the original object is not being modified.
Indeed, it isn't. Why would it be?
After spending a year working with the Microsoft.Xrm.Sdk namespace, I just discovered yesterday the Entity.FormattedValues property contains the text value for Entity specific (ie Local) Option Set texts.
The reason I didn't discover it before, is there is no early bound method of getting the value. i.e. entity.new_myOptionSet is of type OptionSetValue which only contains the int value. You have to call entity.FormattedValues["new_myoptionset"] to get the string text value of the OptionSetValue.
Therefore, I'd like to get the crmsrvcutil to auto-generate a text property for local option sets. i.e. Along with Entity.new_myOptionSet being generated as it currently does, Entity.new_myOptionSetText would be generated as well.
I've looked into the Microsoft.Crm.Services.Utility.ICodeGenerationService, but that looks like it is mostly for specifying what CodeGenerationType something should be...
Is there a way supported way using CrmServiceUtil to add these properties, or am I better off writing a custom app that I can run that can generate these properties as a partial class to the auto-generated ones?
Edit - Example of the code that I would like to be generated
Currently, whenever I need to access the text value of a OptionSetValue, I use this code:
var textValue = OptionSetCache.GetText(service, entity, e => e.New_MyOptionSet);
The option set cache will use the entity.LogicalName, and the property expression to determine the name of the option set that I'm asking for. It will then query the SDK using the RetrieveAttriubteRequest, to get a list of the option set int and text values, which it then caches so it doesn't have to hit CRM again. It then looks up the int value of the New_MyOptionSet of the entity and cross references it with the cached list, to get the text value of the OptionSet.
Instead of doing all of that, I can just do this (assuming that the entity has been retrieved from the server, and not just populated client side):
var textValue = entity.FormattedValues["new_myoptionset"];
but the "new_myoptionset" is no longer early bound. I would like the early bound entity classes that gets generated to also generate an extra "Text" property for OptionSetValue properties that calls the above line, so my entity would have this added to it:
public string New_MyOptionSetText {
return this.GetFormattedAttributeValue("new_myoptionset"); // this is a protected method on the Entity class itself...
}
Could you utilize the CrmServiceUtil extension that will generate enums for your OptionSets and then add your new_myOptionSetText property to a partial class that compares the int value to the enums and returns the enum string
Again, I think specifically for this case, getting CrmSvcUtil.exe to generate the code you want is a great idea, but more generally, you can access the property name via reflection using an approach similar to the accepted answer # workarounds for nameof() operator in C#: typesafe databinding.
var textValue = entity.FormattedValues["new_myoptionset"];
// becomes
var textValue = entity.FormattedValues
[
// renamed the class from Nameof to NameOf
NameOf(Xrm.MyEntity).Property(x => x.new_MyOptionSet).ToLower()
];
The latest version of the CRM Early Bound Generator includes a Fields struct that that contains the field names. This allows accessing the FormattedValues to be as simple as this:
var textValue = entity.FormattedValues[MyEntity.Fields.new_MyOptionSet];
You could create a new property via an interface for the CrmSvcUtil, but that's a lot of work for a fairly simple call, and I don't think it justifies creating additional properties.
I would like to create simple objects at runtime (textbox, label, etc) and add them to a Grid in my WPF application. My problem is that I need to define these in the app.config file. I am reading in the config data by using the “ConfigurationManager.GetSection” method. Shown below is an example of the XML that defines two textboxes. The Key values are always defined as Labels so the following defines two labels called “ID:” and “Name:” and two associated TextBoxes
<HardwareControls>
<add key="ID:" value="System.Windows.Controls.TextBox"/>
<add key="Name:" value="System.Windows.Controls.TextBox"/>
</HardwareControls>
At the moment I use the following code to create a TextBox object but need to modify it so that the control types are defined by the config data and not hardcoded. Can anyone help in how I would go about doing this based on me knowing the control type as defined by a string?
TextBox tb1 = new TextBox();
tb1.Width = 100;
tb1.SetValue(Grid.ColumnProperty, 1);
tb1.SetValue(Grid.RowProperty, i);
I can also see a situation where I may want to define additional values such as the textbox width in the config file. Is there a better solution to store this in the app.config as it looks like the “GetSection” method only supports a key/value pair (I may be rog in that assumption as I haven’t read too much about this yet).
You can use Activator.CreateInstance
Example:
string typeName = "System.Windows.Controls.TextBox";
Type type = Type.GetType(typeName);
object control = Activator.CreateInstance(type); // control is your TextBox
You can use Reflection to create a type from a string name - e.g.
http://en.csharp-online.net/CSharp_FAQ:_How_create_an_instance_of_a_type_using_only_its_name
or
How can I pass an argument to a C# plug-in being loaded through Assembly.CreateInstance?