Could not evaluate cost function using sumBy function in Lodash - angularjs

I have a function called cost in scope.The Primary task of this function is to fetch arrays, filter it based on the requirement and evaluate the cost of the task. It has two parameters called tasks and time.While debugging the function, the array of data passes on tasks and it retains in the second line where my loadash sumBy function exists. I could not get cost out of it.
$scope.cost = function(tasks, time) {
return _.sumBy(tasks, function(t) {
if (t.billable && t[time]) {
var types = _.filter($scope.taskTypes, function(typ) {
return (t.type == typ._id);
});
return t[time] * types[0].rate;
} else {
return 0;
}
});
};
My array has these values.
{
billable: true,
estimatedTime: 6,
jobId: 1234,
label: gh,
status: ÄSSIGNED,
type: 3D-Modelling,
_id:08746574687
}

Related

React: Array sort not reading state value?

So im working on a pretty basic CRUD app to strengthen my react skills. Right now it's a table of sensors with a state that looks like this:
this.state = {
sensors: [
{
id: "1",
name: "Temp001DEV",
device: "Temp",
temp: "56.4",
humidity: "33.1",
active: true
},
{
id: "2",
name: "Humidity002DEV",
device: "Humidity",
temp: "",
humidity: "45.6",
active: true
}
],
filterName: "",
sortBy: "name"
};
}
(Few demo sensors tossed in there for some fake data).
I also have a sorting function (It's a WIP, my javascript is rusty). That looks like so:
filterSort = () => {
//Check for filter, then sort
if (this.state.filterName !== "") {
const filteredSensors = this.state.sensors.filter(sensor =>
sensor.name.toLowerCase().includes(this.state.filterName.toLowerCase())
);
console.log(filteredSensors);
return filteredSensors.sort(function(a, b) {
if(a.name < b.name) {
return -1;
}
if(a.name > b.name) {
return 1;
}
else {
return 0;
}
});
}
//If no filter exists, just sort
else {
return this.state.sensors.sort(function(a, b) {
if(a.name < b.name) {
return -1;
}
if(a.name > b.name) {
return 1;
}
else {
return 0;
}
});;
}
};
The table is created by mapping through the returned "Filtered/Sorted" array and the table is created that way (Which works). I also have dropdowns and a text input that update the sortBy and filterName state (Which also works).
Where im running into issues is where i actually call sort on the filteredSensors. Right now I have a.name < b.name etc... (Which does work). But I want it to actually sort based on the state value sortBy (Which can be either name, active, or device based on a dropdown I have). However when I try to do something like const sortVal = this.state.sortBy and then swap out .name for .sortVal it doesn't work.
It will just say that the sortVal is never used. Any ideas on how to swap out the sorting based off a state value?
Thanks!
You're trying to use a variable called "sortVal" on the elements on the sort function by using dot notation. If you instead use a[sortVal] and b[sortVal] it will work as it will instead use the variable that sortVal evaluates to (such as humidity) as intented.

How to execute promises "sync" and not in async way

I calling getBubblesUserAccess that returns json objects that are orderd in a special way. This results i wanna run a foreach and get other messages but there i wanna return them in "order". I know that it will run these async but there must be a way that i can force it to "sequential" execution. (above code is my last attempt to add a defer...)
Example
pseudo code - get my groups
{
"id":"016cd1fc-89a3-4e4a-9e6e-a102df1b03d9",
"parent":"53750396-7d26-41f3-913d-1b93276b9e09",
"name":"XX",
"createdBy":"c9c63080-2c5b-4e8e-a093-2cfcd628a9d0",
"hasWriteAccess":true,
"hasCreateAccess":false,
"hasDeleteAccess":false,
"hasAdminAccess":false,
"settingsBubbleId":"00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000"
},
{
"id":"016cd1fc-89a3-4e4a-9e6e-a102df1b03d9",
"parent":"53750396-7d26-41f3-913d-1b93276b9e09",
"name":"XX",
"createdBy":"c9c63080-2c5b-4e8e-a093-2cfcd628a9d0",
"hasWriteAccess":true,
"hasCreateAccess":false,
"hasDeleteAccess":false,
"hasAdminAccess":false,
"settingsBubbleId":"00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000"
}
From this result i wanna iterate over those parent id strings and call another service that respond with this.
pseudo code
for each group above call another service with parent id and get result. This result will be added to a new JSON object.
"messages":[
{
"id":"f1d1aeda-d4e2-4563-85d5-d954c335b31c",
"text":"asd",
"sent":"2015-09-10T22:31:09.897+00:00",
"sender":"6b9e404b-ef37-4d07-9267-3e7b2579003b",
"senderName":"XXX XXXX"
},
{
"id":"a7ac0432-e945-440e-91ce-185170cbf3de",
"text":"asd",
"sent":"2015-09-10T22:28:24.383+00:00",
"sender":"c9c63080-2c5b-4e8e-a093-2cfcd628a9d0",
"senderName":"ZZZZZ ZZZZ"
},
My problem is that my second foreach are running async (as it should) and i want it to resolve back in same order as first json object...
My code::
var loadBubblesAccess = function () {
if (vm.running && angular.isDefined(vm.running)) { return; }
vm.running = true;
vm.bubblesWithMessages = null;
return BubbleFactory.getBubblesUserAccess().then(function (bubblesAccessTo) {
return bubblesAccessTo;
});
},
loadSubBubbles = function (bubblesAccessTo) {
/**
* Result from chain method with all bubbles user has access to.
*/
var promiseArray = [];
//var promiseArrayError = [];
var i = 0;
/**
* Creates a defer object so that we will not resolve before for each loop has been gone thru.. async problems.
*/
var deferred = $q.defer();
angular.forEach(bubblesAccessTo, function (bubble) {
$log.error(JSON.stringify(bubblesAccessTo));
/**
* Get 20 because default thats default and cache and e-tags are done to that number..
*/
BubbleFactory.getBubbleMessages(bubble.id, 0, 20, false).then(function (data) {
i++;
if (data.messages.length > 0) {
promiseArray.push({ bubbleSortOrder: i, bubbleId: bubble.parent, bubbleName: bubble.name, bubbleMessagesId: bubble.id, bubbleMessages: smartTrim(data.messages[0].text, 400, ' ', ' ...'), bubbleMessagesSent: data.messages[0].sent });
}
else {
// console.log("YYYY::: " + bubble.parent);
promiseArray.push({ bubbleSortOrder:i, bubbleId: bubble.parent, bubbleName: bubble.name, bubbleMessagesId: bubble.id, bubbleMessages: 'Inget meddelande än..', bubbleMessagesSent: '' });
}
});
/**
* Check if we have gone thru all bubbles - when finished we resolve defer object.
*/
if(i===bubblesAccessTo.length)
{
deferred.resolve(promiseArray);
}
});
//$log.debug.log(promiseArray);
vm.bubblesWithMessages = promiseArray;
promiseArray.length = 0;
vm.running = false;
};
loadBubblesAccess().then(loadSubBubbles);
The $q service in AngularJS is described as "lightweight" because it only implements the functions 90% of people need. That keeps its code size small - at the expense of not being able to address requests like yours very easily.
If you have the option, try an alternative such as bluebird. Bluebird provides a reduce() function that can execute an array of promises serially, and return their results in the order they were requested. It makes this task straightforward because your result array will match your data array and you can match up the results very easily.
If you do NOT have that option, there is a standard (if not-exactly-simple) technique with promises where you build an array of the elements you want to promise, then call the processing function (that returns a Promise) on the first value (popped from the array). In the .finally() handler, call the processing function recursively with the next value until it is empty (or an error occurs).
Pseudo-code for this:
var valuesToProcess = [1, 2, 3],
results = [];
function processValue(val) {
myProcessingFunction(val).then(function(result) {
results.push(result);
}).catch(function(e) {
console.log('FAIL!', e);
}).finally(function() {
if (valuesToProcess.length > 0) {
processValue(valuesToProcess.shift());
} else {
// All done - do something with results here
}
});
}
// Note: No error checking done, assumes we have work to do...
processValue(valuesToProcess.shift());
You'll need to adapt this to your use-case but it's a simple technique that guarantees serial operation and result-handling.

Nodejs async data duplication

I'm having some problems with one async process on nodejs.
I'm getting some data from a remote JSON and adding it in my array, this JSON have some duplicated values, and I need check if it already exists on my array before add it to avoid data duplication.
My problem is when I start the loop between the JSON values, the loop call the next value before the latest one be process be finished, so, my array is filled with duplicated data instead of maintain only one item per type.
Look my current code:
BookRegistration.prototype.process_new_books_list = function(data, callback) {
var i = 0,
self = this;
_.each(data, function(book) {
i++;
console.log('\n\n ------------------------------------------------------------ \n\n');
console.log('BOOK: ' + book.volumeInfo.title);
self.process_author(book, function() { console.log('in author'); });
console.log('\n\n ------------------------------------------------------------');
if(i == data.length) callback();
})
}
BookRegistration.prototype.process_author = function(book, callback) {
if(book.volumeInfo.authors) {
var author = { name: book.volumeInfo.authors[0].toLowerCase() };
if(!this.in_array(this.authors, author)) {
this.authors.push(author);
callback();
}
}
}
BookRegistration.prototype.in_array = function(list, obj) {
for(i in list) { if(list[i] === obj) return true; }
return false;
}
The result is:
[{name: author1 }, {name: author2}, {name: author1}]
And I need:
[{name: author1 }, {name: author2}]
UPDATED:
The solution suggested by #Zub works fine with arrays, but not with sequelize and mysql database.
When I try to save my authors list on the database, the data is duplicated, because the system started to save another array element before finish to save the last one.
What is the correct pattern on this case?
My code using database is:
BookRegistration.prototype.process_author = function(book, callback) {
if(book.volumeInfo.authors) {
var author = { name: book.volumeInfo.authors[0].toLowerCase() };
var self = this;
models.Author.count({ where: { name: book.volumeInfo.authors[0].toLowerCase() }}).success(function(count) {
if(count < 1) {
models.Author.create(author).success(function(author) {
console.log('SALVANDO AUTHOR');
self.process_publisher({ book:book, author:author }, callback);
});
} else {
models.Author.find({where: { name: book.volumeInfo.authors[0].toLowerCase() }}).success(function(author) {
console.log('FIND AUTHOR');
self.process_publisher({ book:book, author:author }, callback);
});
}
});
// if(!this.in_array(this.authors, 'name', author)) {
// this.authors.push(author);
// console.log('AQUI NO AUTHOR');
// this.process_publisher(book, callback);
// }
}
}
How can I avoid data duplication in an async process?
This is because you are comparing different objects and result is always false.
Just for experiment type in the console:
var obj1 = {a:1};
var obj2 = {a:1};
obj1 == obj2; //false
When comparing objects (as well as arrays) it only results true when obj1 links to obj2:
var obj1 = {a:1};
var obj2 = obj1;
obj1 == obj2; //true
Since you create new author objects in each process_author call you always get false when comparing.
In your case the solution would be to compare name property for each book:
BookRegistration.prototype.in_array = function(list, obj) {
for(i in list) { if(list[i].name === obj.name) return true; }
return false;
}
EDIT (related to your comment question):
I would rewrite process_new_books_list method as follows:
BookRegistration.prototype.process_new_books_list = function(data, callback) {
var i = 0,
self = this;
(function nextBook() {
var book = data[i];
if (!book) {
callback();
return;
}
self.process_author(book, function() {
i++;
nextBook();
});
})();
}
In this case next process_author is being called not immediately (like with _.each), but after callback is executed, so you have consequence in your program.
Not sure is this works though.
Sorry for my English, I'm not a native English speaker

Node.js : control flow with forEach

I am trying to create array from database objects :
I have entity "group" wich hasMany "devices", I want to create array whit all groups and for each groups the list of his devices :
[
{
"group_id": “1”,
"name": “My_group”,
"devices_list": [1, 2, 18]
},
{
"group_id": “2”,
"name": “My_second_group”,
"devices_list": [3, 24]
}
]
I tried several ways like this :
Group.all(function (err, groups) {
var resJson = {};
groups.forEach(function(group, index){
group.devices(function(err, devices){
resJson[index] = group;
console.log(devices);
resJson[index].devices_list = devices;
//End of the loop
if (index == groups.length -1){
send({code: 200, data: resJson});
}
});
});
});
EDIT 1 :
I tried this way too :
var resJson = {};
groups.forEach(function(group, index){
group.devices(function(err, devices){
resJson[index] = group;
resJson[index].devices_list = [];
devices.forEach(function(device,index2){
resJson[index].devices_list.push(device);
});
//End of the loop
if (index == groups.length -1){
send({code: 200, data: resJson});
}
});
});
But finally, my resJson contains only empty groups (groups without device associated), the other groups are not visible. Thus my devices_list are all empty whereas the console.log(devices) display devices.
It seems that the "send" instruction is processed before the treatment of non-empty groups.
What is the rigth way to do this ?
Thank you for your time
Instead of tracking and using an index against the length of the list perhaps you could use an after type of construct. I really enjoy them and they're easy to integrate and serve the perfect purpose for doing something after a set number of times.
First, lets define an after function you can use.
var after = function(amount, fn) {
var count = 0;
return function() {
count += 1;
if (count >= amount) {
fn.apply(arguments);
}
};
};
That should work for you now, let's modify your code sample to use this.
var json = []; // To return, you originally wanted an array.
Group.all(function(err, groups) {
if (err) {
// Handle the error
} else {
var sendJson = after(groups.length, function(json) {
send({code: 200, data: json});
});
groups.forEach(function(group) {
group.devices(function(err, devices) {
if (err) {
// Handle the error...
} else {
group.devices_list = devices;
json.push(group); // This part is different, using this method you'll match the JSON you gave as your "goal"
}
// This is outside the if/else because it needs to be called for every group
// regardless of change. If you do not call this the exact number of times
// that you specified it will never fire.
sendJson(json);
});
}
});
Perhaps something like that might clear up your issue.

Underscore.js groupBy multiple values

Using Underscore.js, I'm trying to group a list of items multiple times, ie
Group by SIZE then for each SIZE, group by CATEGORY...
http://jsfiddle.net/rickysullivan/WTtXP/1/
Ideally, I'd like to have a function or extend _.groupBy() so that you can throw an array at it with the paramaters to group by.
var multiGroup = ['size', 'category'];
Probably could just make a mixin...
_.mixin({
groupByMulti: function(obj, val, arr) {
var result = {};
var iterator = typeof val == 'function' ? val : function(obj) {
return obj[val];
};
_.each(arr, function(arrvalue, arrIndex) {
_.each(obj, function(value, objIndex) {
var key = iterator(value, objIndex);
var arrresults = obj[objIndex][arrvalue];
if (_.has(value, arrvalue))
(result[arrIndex] || (result[arrIndex] = [])).push(value);
My head hurts, but I think some more pushing needs to go here...
});
})
return result;
}
});
properties = _.groupByMulti(properties, function(item) {
var testVal = item["size"];
if (parseFloat(testVal)) {
testVal = parseFloat(item["size"])
}
return testVal
}, multiGroup);
A simple recursive implementation:
_.mixin({
/*
* #mixin
*
* Splits a collection into sets, grouped by the result of running each value
* through iteratee. If iteratee is a string instead of a function, groups by
* the property named by iteratee on each of the values.
*
* #param {array|object} list - The collection to iterate over.
* #param {(string|function)[]} values - The iteratees to transform keys.
* #param {object=} context - The values are bound to the context object.
*
* #returns {Object} - Returns the composed aggregate object.
*/
groupByMulti: function(list, values, context) {
if (!values.length) {
return list;
}
var byFirst = _.groupBy(list, values[0], context),
rest = values.slice(1);
for (var prop in byFirst) {
byFirst[prop] = _.groupByMulti(byFirst[prop], rest, context);
}
return byFirst;
}
});
Demo in your jsfiddle
I think #Bergi's answer can be streamlined a bit by utilizing Lo-Dash's mapValues (for mapping functions over object values). It allows us to group the entries in an array by multiple keys in a nested fashion:
_ = require('lodash');
var _.nest = function (collection, keys) {
if (!keys.length) {
return collection;
}
else {
return _(collection).groupBy(keys[0]).mapValues(function(values) {
return nest(values, keys.slice(1));
}).value();
}
};
I renamed the method to nest because it ends up serving much the same role served by D3's nest operator. See this gist for details and this fiddle for demonstrated usage with your example.
lodash nest groupby
How about this rather simple hack?
console.log(_.groupBy(getProperties(), function(record){
return (record.size+record.category);
}));
Check out this underscore extension: Underscore.Nest, by Irene Ros.
This extension's output will be slightly different from what you specify, but the module is only about 100 lines of code, so you should be able to scan to get direction.
This is a great use case for the reduce phase of map-reduce. It's not going to be as visually elegant as the multi-group function (you can't just pass in an array of keys to group on), but overall this pattern gives you more flexibility to transform your data. EXAMPLE
var grouped = _.reduce(
properties,
function(buckets, property) {
// Find the correct bucket for the property
var bucket = _.findWhere(buckets, {size: property.size, category: property.category});
// Create a new bucket if needed.
if (!bucket) {
bucket = {
size: property.size,
category: property.category,
items: []
};
buckets.push(bucket);
}
// Add the property to the correct bucket
bucket.items.push(property);
return buckets;
},
[] // The starting buckets
);
console.log(grouped)
But if you just want it in an underscore mixin, here's my stab at it:
_.mixin({
'groupAndSort': function (items, sortList) {
var grouped = _.reduce(
items,
function (buckets, item) {
var searchCriteria = {};
_.each(sortList, function (searchProperty) { searchCriteria[searchProperty] = item[searchProperty]; });
var bucket = _.findWhere(buckets, searchCriteria);
if (!bucket) {
bucket = {};
_.each(sortList, function (property) { bucket[property] = item[property]; });
bucket._items = [];
buckets.push(bucket);
}
bucket._items.push(item);
return buckets;
},
[] // Initial buckets
);
grouped.sort(function (x, y) {
for (var i in sortList) {
var property = sortList[i];
if (x[property] != y[property])
return x[property] > y[property] ? 1 : -1;
}
return 0;
});
return _.map(grouped, function (group) {
var toReturn = { key: {}, value: group.__items };
_.each(sortList, function (searchProperty) { toReturn.key[searchProperty] = group[searchProperty]; });
return toReturn;
});
});
The improvements by joyrexus on bergi's method don't take advantage of the underscore/lodash mixin system. Here it is as a mixin:
_.mixin({
nest: function (collection, keys) {
if (!keys.length) {
return collection;
} else {
return _(collection).groupBy(keys[0]).mapValues(function(values) {
return _.nest(values, keys.slice(1));
}).value();
}
}
});
An example with lodash and mixin
_.mixin({
'groupByMulti': function (collection, keys) {
if (!keys.length) {
return collection;
} else {
return _.mapValues(_.groupBy(collection,_.first(keys)),function(values) {
return _.groupByMulti(values, _.rest(keys));
});
}
}
});
Here is an easy to understand function.
function mixin(list, properties){
function grouper(i, list){
if(i < properties.length){
var group = _.groupBy(list, function(item){
var value = item[properties[i]];
delete item[properties[i]];
return value;
});
_.keys(group).forEach(function(key){
group[key] = grouper(i+1, group[key]);
});
return group;
}else{
return list;
}
}
return grouper(0, list);
}
Grouping by a composite key tends to work better for me in most situations:
const groups = _.groupByComposite(myList, ['size', 'category']);
Demo using OP's fiddle
Mixin
_.mixin({
/*
* #groupByComposite
*
* Groups an array of objects by multiple properties. Uses _.groupBy under the covers,
* to group by a composite key, generated from the list of provided keys.
*
* #param {Object[]} collection - the array of objects.
* #param {string[]} keys - one or more property names to group by.
* #param {string} [delimiter=-] - a delimiter used in the creation of the composite key.
*
* #returns {Object} - the composed aggregate object.
*/
groupByComposite: (collection, keys, delimiter = '-') =>
_.groupBy(collection, (item) => {
const compositeKey = [];
_.each(keys, key => compositeKey.push(item[key]));
return compositeKey.join(delimiter);
}),
});

Resources