Consider an example:
const someElement = <CustomElement value="some" />;
function Foo({ style }) {
return <Bar style={style}>{someElement}</Bar>;
}
Are there any pitfalls if I want to keep passing the same instance of React element as props to children? How normal and acceptable is this specific case for React's reconciliation?
I suspect that your approach is sound. Then again, I'm not sure this will solve your problem; it still has to calculate someElement. I would consider using truly static data (e.g. literal HTML) and I believe React has specific facilities for that (dangerouslySetInnerHTML?). Also, note that when Bar updates it still has to do a DOM compare all the way down the tree. It would not seem that it could know there's something special about someElement that would obviate the need to compare that part of the DOM tree. I think you'd need to at least give the outer tag of your literal a key but this key needn't change unless you repeat the stuff as siblings. This approach seems fraught even though it may be technically sound.
Another approach that might work is to make it a traditional component but override the method that tells it whether it needs to update. Obviously, it never needs to update but it would still incur the cost of the initial calculation of the DOM. I believe your suggestion still incurs that cost, as well. Maybe a component that does nothing but dangerouslySetInnerHTML and refuses all updates could do the trick; zero calculation.
I am testing a WPF application and am not privy to it's exact workings but I am finding many instances where I need to find if a control is shown. All the traditional answers on this on Stack Overflow and MS forums etc say to use one of the following ...
IsVisible,
Exists,
TryGetClickablePoint,
State (e.g. OffScreen
The problem is that for this system, many controls return true for all of those even when the control cannot be seen! They also return a point with co-ordinates (-1, -1, -1, -1) whether the control is visible or not.
The only thing I have had any success with is using a try catch finally. I try to click on the control and if that fails, I go in to the catch block. That takes 60 seconds to time out though and I am getting intermittent issues with tests that run 9 times out of 10. Maybe the constant use of try catch is causing performance issues.
Is there an approach that actually works when all the standard approaches fail? I have noticed lots of other people asking these question are also testing WPF. Is there something WPF developers are doing to hide controls that makes CodedUI think they are still present and visible etc. Are they just behind something?
Many thanks in advance.
The solution was two-fold. Firstly I had to find the element and this was not working properly with my recorded steps. The element was buried too deeply in the system under test which is WPF (XAML). Secondly I had to prove I had found the element and for this I can't use TryGetClickablePoint, Exists, Top or Width. None of them seemed to work properly at all for my element. I had to use State.
public void Assert_MyElementShown()
{
#region Variable Declarations
WpfCustom uISurfaceCustom = this.UISysUnderTestClientShWindow.UIItemCustom1.UISurfaceCustom;
WpfCustom uIYAxisLabelsCustom = new WpfCustom();
#endregion
//Find the Element using it's Container and SearchProperties
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.Container = uISurfaceCustom;
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.SearchProperties[WpfControl.PropertyNames.ClassName] = "Uia.AxisLabelControl";
uIYAxisLabelsCustom.SearchProperties[WpfControl.PropertyNames.AutomationId] = "YAxisLabels";
//Use the State to find if it's on screen or not
var state = uIYAxisLabelsCustom.State;
if (state == Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UITest.Extension.ControlStates.Default)
{
//Element is visible, do stuff here!
}
else if (state == Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UITest.Extension.ControlStates.Offscreen)
{
//The control may exist, it may have location on screen and may even
//appear to be clickable according to coded ui framework but is is NOT
//shown on the screen.
}
}
You can try this approach for your application..if control properties are showing true for viable than we can go for height and width.Means if control is not visible in UI and but still all properties are showing true than check control height and width must be in -ve number.Than we can keep a assertion like
If control.height<0
Not visible in UI
I have an array with a few items in it. Every x seconds, I receive a new array with the latest data. I check if the data has changed, and if it has, I replace the old one with the new one:
if (currentList != responseFromHttpCall) {
currentList = responseFromHttpCall;
}
This messes up the classes provided by ng-animate, as it acts like I replaced all of the items -- well, I do actually, but I don't know how to not.
These changes can occur in the list:
There's one (or more) new item(s) in the list - not necessaryly at the end of the list though.
One (or more) items in the list might be gone (deleted).
One (or more) items might be changed.
Two (or more) items might have been swapped.
Can anyone help me in getting ng-animate to understand what classes to show? I made a small "illustation" of my problem, found here: http://plnkr.co/edit/TS401ra58dgJS18ydsG1?p=preview
Thanks a lot!
To achieve what you want, you will need to modify existing list on controller (vm.list) on every action. I have one solution that may work for your particular example.
you would need to compare 2 lists (loop through first) similar to:
vm.list.forEach((val, index)=>{
// some code to check against array that's coming from ajax call
});
in case of adding you would need to loop against other list (in your case newList):
newList.forEach((val, index)=>{
// some code to check array on controller
});
I'm not saying this is the best solution but it works and will work in your case. Keep in mind - to properly test you will need to click reset after each action since you are looking at same global original list which will persist same data throughout the app cycle since we don't change it - if you want to change it just add before end of each function:
original = angular.copy(vm.list);
You could also make this more generic and put everything on one function, but for example, here's plnkr:
http://plnkr.co/edit/sr5CHji6DbiiknlgFdNm?p=preview
Hope it helps.
I'm trying to use ng-grid with a sliding window of 100 records. The data is coming in realtime via signalR and every message trigger the following method:
onNewTrades(records) {
console.log("onNewRecord", records);
if (connectionStopped) return;
for (var i = 0; i < records.length; i++) {
if ($scope.recordsData.length > maxRecordsInTable)
$scope.recordsData.pop();
$scope.recordsData.unshift({
t: new Date(records[i][0]),
p: records[i][1],
a: records[i][2]
});
}
}
I have a threshold of 100 maxRecordsInTable before I start popping items off the end (before adding the new message to the front)
However, when it reaches my threshold the table simple stops updating. Strangely though, if I set a breakpoint on unshift(), the table does update with every "continue".
I suspect it's some kind of angular timing issue? I tried using $timeout()
Or may when I pop() and unshift() at the same time it doesn't pick up a change in the array? I tried using $apply() (error already in digest cycle)
There are a few things that could be happening here.
First of all, if onNewTrade is using an external, non-angular, library making xhr requests outside of angular's framework (i.e. not using $http or $resource), you have to call $scope.$apply(function(){ }) around the code you want the scope's digest to know about. That part's not clear from what you've provided. edit: Read more about when to use $scope.$apply
Second, angular's digest phase does a minimum of two passes (first to make changes, second to make sure there are no more changes). It does at most 10 passes by default. If angular evaluates the scope 10 times and it is not consistent, it gives up. see documentation. It does this because you can have multiple watch functions where one watch affects the scope higher in the hierarchy, which makes changes and affects the same watch.. basically causing an evented infinite loop. Do you see a console error about '10 $digest iterations, aborting!' or something similar?
There are a couple of other questionable things:
is onNewRecord asynchronous? If so, I would doubt connectionStopped is being done correctly. You could be returning early. Because you say a breakpoint shows values on unshift, its probably not the cause of this issue (and most likely missing $scope.$apply is the problem), but I'd rethink this code.
Your function is onNewTrade(records), but you log onNewRecord(record). If you have nested variables here, make sure you haven't excluded code that may contain typos (e.g. record instead of records). You might be working on an unexpected object.
My UIPageViewController was working fine in iOS 5. But when iOS 6 came along, I wanted to use the new scroll transition style (UIPageViewControllerTransitionStyleScroll) instead of the page curl style. This caused my UIPageViewController to break.
It works fine except right after I've called setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion:. After that, the next time the user scrolls manually by one page, we get the wrong page. What's wrong here?
My workaround of this bug was to create a block when finished that was setting the same viewcontroller but without animation
__weak YourSelfClass *blocksafeSelf = self;
[self.pageViewController setViewControllers:viewControllers direction:UIPageViewControllerNavigationDirectionForward animated:YES completion:^(BOOL finished){
if(finished)
{
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue(), ^{
[blocksafeSelf.pageViewController setViewControllers:viewControllers direction:UIPageViewControllerNavigationDirectionForward animated:NO completion:NULL];// bug fix for uipageview controller
});
}
}];
This is actually a bug in UIPageViewController. It occurs only with the scroll style (UIPageViewControllerTransitionStyleScroll) and only after calling setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion: with animated:YES. Thus there are two workarounds:
Don't use UIPageViewControllerTransitionStyleScroll.
Or, if you call setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion:, use only animated:NO.
To see the bug clearly, call setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion: and then, in the interface (as user), navigate left (back) to the preceding page manually. You will navigate back to the wrong page: not the preceding page at all, but the page you were on when setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion: was called.
The reason for the bug appears to be that, when using the scroll style, UIPageViewController does some sort of internal caching. Thus, after the call to setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion:, it fails to clear its internal cache. It thinks it knows what the preceding page is. Thus, when the user navigates leftward to the preceding page, UIPageViewController fails to call the dataSource method pageViewController:viewControllerBeforeViewController:, or calls it with the wrong current view controller.
I have posted a movie that clearly demonstrates how to see the bug:
http://www.apeth.com/PageViewControllerBug.mov
EDIT This bug will probably be fixed in iOS 8.
EDIT For another interesting workaround for this bug, see this answer: https://stackoverflow.com/a/21624169/341994
Here is a "rough" gist I put together. It contains a UIPageViewController alternative that suffers from Alzheimer (ie: it doesn't have the internal caching of the Apple implementation).
This class isn't complete but it works in my situation (namely: horizontal scroll).
As of iOS 12 the problem described in the original question seems to be almost fixed. I came to this question because I experienced it in my particular setup, in which it does still happen, hence the word "almost" here.
The setup I experienced this issue was:
1) the app was opened via a deep link
2) based on the link the app had to switch to a particular tab and open a given item there via push
3) described issue happened only when the target tab was not previously selected by user (so that UIPageViewController was supposed to animate to that tab) and only when setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion: had animated = true
4) after the push returning back to the view controller containing the UIPageViewController, the latter was found to be a big mess - it was presenting completely wrong view controllers, even though debugging showed everything was fine on the logic level
I supposed that the root of the problem was that I was pushing view controller very quick after setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion: called, so that the UIPageViewController had no chance to finish something (maybe animation, or caching, or something else).
Simply giving UIPageViewController some spare time by delaying my programmatic navigation in UI via
DispatchQueue.main.asyncAfter(deadline: DispatchTime.now() + 1) { ... }
fixed the issue for me. And it also made the programmatic opening of the linked item more user friendly visually.
Hope this helps someone in similar situation.
Because pageviewVC call multi childVC when swipe it. But we just need last page that visible.
In my case, I need to change index for segmented control when change pageView.
Hope this help someone :)
extension ViewController: UIPageViewControllerDelegate {
func pageViewController(_ pageViewController: UIPageViewController, didFinishAnimating finished: Bool, previousViewControllers: [UIViewController], transitionCompleted completed: Bool) {
guard let pageView = pageViewController.viewControllers?.first as? ChildViewController else { return }
segmentedControl.set(pageView.index)
}
}
This bug still exists in iOS9. I am using the same workaround that George Tsifrikas posted above, but a Swift version:
pageViewController.setViewControllers([page], direction: direction, animated: true) { done in
if done {
dispatch_async(dispatch_get_main_queue()) {
self.pageViewController.setViewControllers([page], direction: direction, animated: false, completion: {done in })
}
}
}
Another simple workaround in Swift: Just reset the UIPageViewController's datasource. This apparently clears its cache and works around the bug. Here's a method to go directly to a page without breaking subsequent swipes. In the following, m_pages is an array of your view controllers. I show how to find currPage (the index of the current page) below.
func goToPage(_ index: Int, animated: Bool)
{
if m_pages.count > 0 && index >= 0 && index < m_pages.count && index != currPage
{
var dir: UIPageViewController.NavigationDirection
if index < currPage
{
dir = UIPageViewController.NavigationDirection.reverse
}
else
{
dir = UIPageViewController.NavigationDirection.forward
}
m_pageViewController.setViewControllers([m_pages[index]], direction: dir, animated: animated, completion: nil)
delegate?.tabDisplayed(sender: self, index: index)
m_pageViewController.dataSource = self;
}
}
How to find the current page:
var currPage: Int
{
get
{
if let currController = m_pageViewController.viewControllers?[0]
{
return m_pages.index(of: currController as! AtomViewController) ?? 0
}
return 0
}
}
STATEMENT:
It seems that Apple has spotted that developers are using UIPageViewController in very different applications that go way beyond the
originally intended ones Apple based their design-choices on in the first place. Rather than using it in a gesture driven linear fashion
PVC is often used to programmatically jump to random
positions within a structured environment. So they have enhanced their implementation of UIPageViewController and the class is now calling both DataSource
callbacks
- (UIViewController *)pageViewController:(UIPageViewController *)pageViewController viewControllerBeforeViewController:(UIViewController *)viewController
- (UIViewController *)pageViewController:(UIPageViewController *)pageViewController viewControllerAfterViewController:(UIViewController *)viewController
after setting a new contentViewController on UIPageViewController with
[self.pageViewController setViewControllers:viewControllers direction:UIPageViewControllerNavigationDirectionForward animated:YES completion:nil];
even if an animated turn of pages rather suggests a linear progress in an e.g. page hierarchy like a book or PDF with consecutive pages. Although - I doubt that Apple from a HIG standpoint
is very fond of seeing PVC being used this way, but - it doesn't break backwards compatibility, it was an easy fix, so - they eventually did it. Actually it is just one more call of one of the two DataSource methods that is absolutely unnecessary in a linear environment where pages (ViewControllers) have already been cashed for later use.
However, even if this enhancement might come in very handy for certain use-cases the initial behavior of the class is NOT to be considered a bug. The fact that a lot of developers do - also in other
posts on SO that accuse UIPageViewController of misbehavior - rather emphasizes a widely spread misconception of its design, purpose and functionality.
Without trying to offend any of my fellow developers here in this great facility I nonetheless decided not to remove my initial 'disquisition' that clearly explains to the OP the mechanics of PVC and why his assumption is wrong that he has to deal with a bug here.
This might also be of use for any other fellow developer too who struggles with some intricacies in the implementation of UIPageViewController!
ORIGINAL ANSWER:
After having read all the answers over and over again - included the
accepted one - there is just one more thing left to say...
The design of UIPageViewController is absolutely FLAWLESS and all the
hacks you submit in order to circumvent an alleged bug is nothing but
remedies for your own faulty assumptions because you goofed it up in the
first place!!!
THERE IS NO BUG AT ALL! You are just fighting the framework. I'll explain why!
There is so much talk about page numbers and indices! These are concepts the
controller knows NOTHING about! The only thing it knows is - it is showing
some content (btw. provided by you as a dataViewController) and that it can
do something like a right/left animation in order to imitate a page turn.
CURL or SCROLL...!!!
In the pageViewController's world there only exists a current SPACE (let's call
it just this way to avoid confusion with pages and indices).
When you initially set a pageViewController it only minds about this very SPACE.
Only when you start panning its view it starts asking its DataSource what it
eventually should display in case a left/right flip should happen. When you start
panning to the left the PVC asks first for the BEFORE-SPACE and then for the
AFTER-SPACE, in case you start to the right it does it the other way round.
After the completed animation (a new SPACE is displayed by the PVC's view) the
PVC considers this SPACE as its new center of the universe and while it is at it, it
asks the DataSource about the one it still does not know anything about. In case of
a completed turn to the right it wants to know about the new AFTER space and in
case of a completed turn to the left it asks for a new BEFORE space.
The old BEFORE space (from before the animation) is in case of a completed turn to
the right completely obsolete and gets deallocated as soon as possible. The old center
is now the new BEFORE and the former AFTER is the new center. Everything just
shifted one step to the right.
So - no talk of 'which page' or 'whatever index' - just simply - is there a BEFORE or
an AFTER space. If you return NIL to one of the DataSource callbacks the PVC just
assumes it is at one extreme of your range of SPACES. If you return NIL to both
callbacks it assumes it is showing the one and only SPACE there is and will never
ever again call a DataSource callback anymore! The logic is up to you! You define
pages and indices in your code! Not the PVC!!!
For the user of the class there are two means of interacting with the PVC.
A pan-gesture that indicates whether a turn to the BEFORE/AFTER space is desired
A method - namely setViewControllers:direction:animated:completion:
This method does exactly the same than the pan gesture is doing. You are indicating the
direction (e.g. UIPageViewControllerNavigationDirectionBackward/Forward)
for the animation - if there is one intended - which in other words just means -> going to
BEFORE or AFTER...
Again - no mentioning of indices, page-numbers etc....!!!
It is just a programmatically way of achieving the same a gesture would!
And the PVC is doing right by showing the old content again when moving back
to the left after having moved to the right in the first place. Remember
- it is just showing content (that you provide) in a structured way - which is a 'single page turn' by design!!!
That is the concept of a page turn - or BOOK, if you like that term better!
Just because you goof it up by submitting PAGE 8 after PAGE 1 doesn't mean the PVC
cares at all about your twisted opinion of how a book should work. And the user of your
apps neither. Flipping to the right and back to the left should definitely result in reaching
the original page - IF done with an animation. And it is up to YOU to correct the goof by
finding a solution for the disaster. Don't blame it on the UIPageViewController. It is doing
its job perfectly!
Just ask yourself - would you do the same thing with a PAGE-CURL animation? NO ?
Well, neither should you with a SCROLL animation!!! An animated page turn is a page turn and only a page turn!
In either mode!
And if you decide to tear out PAGE 2 to PAGE 7 of your BOOK that's perfectly fine!
But just don't expect UIPageViewController to invent a non-existing PAGE 7 when turning back to the recent page unless YOU tell it that things have changed...
If you really want to achieve an uncoordinated jump to elsewhere, well - do it without an
animation! In most cases this will not be very elegant but - it's possible... -
And the PVC even plays nicely along! When jumping to a new SPACE without animation
it will ask you further down the road for both - the BEFORE and AFTER controller. So your application-logic can keep up with the PVC...
But with an animation you are always conveying - move to the previous/next space (BEFORE -
AFTER). So logically there is no need at all for the PVC to ask again about a space it already
knows about when animating page turns!!!
If you wanna see PAGE 7 when flipping back to the left after having animated from PAGE 1
to the right - well, I would say - that's definitely your very own problem!
And just in case you are looking for a better solution than the 'completion-block' hack from
the accepted answer (because with it you are doing work beforehand for something that might
possibly not even get used further down the road) use the gesture recognizer delegate:
- (BOOL)gestureRecognizerShouldBegin:(UIGestureRecognizer *)gestureRecognizer
Set your PVC's DataViewController here (without animation) if you really intend to go back
left to PAGE 7 and the DataSource will be asked for BEFORE and AFTER and you can submit
whatever page you like! With a flag or ivar that you should have stashed away when doing your uncontrolled
jump from PAGE 1 to 8 this should be no problem...
And when people keep on complaining about a bug in the PVC - doing 2 page turns when it is
supposed to do 1 turn only - point them to this article.
Same problem - triggering an un-animated setViewControllers: method within the transition gesture
will cause exactly the same havoc. You think you set the new center - the DataSource is asked
for the new BEFORE - AFTER dataController - you reset your index count... - Well, that seems OK...
But - after all that business the PVC ends its transition/animation and wants to know about the
next (still unknown to it) dataViewController (BEFORE or AFTER) and also triggers the DataSource. That's totally justified ! It needs to know where in its small BEFORE - CENTER - AFTER
world it is and be prepared for the next turn.
But your program-logic adds another index++ count to its logic and suddenly got 2 page turns !!!
And that is one off from where you think you are.
And YOU have to account for that! Not UIPageViewController !!!
That is exactly the point of the DataSourceProtocol only having two methods! It wants to be as generic as possible - leaving you the space and freedom to define your own logic and not being stuck with somebody else's special ideas and use-cases! The logic is completely up to you. And only because you find functions like
- (DataViewController *)viewControllerAtIndex:(NSUInteger)index storyboard:(UIStoryboard *)storyboard position:(GSPositionOfDataViewController)position;
- (NSUInteger)indexOfViewController:(DataViewController *)viewController;
in all the copy/pasted sample applications in the cloud doesn't necessarily mean that you have to eat that pre-cook food! Extend them any way you like! Just look above - in my signature you will find a 'position:' argument! I extended this to know later on if a completed page turn was a right or a left turn. Because the delegate unfortunately just tells you whether your turn completed or not! It doesn't tell you about the direction! But this sometimes matters for index-counting, depending on your application's need...
Go crazy - they are your's...
HAPPY CODING !!!