So my question is: how do I scan the JSON in angular to find the first instance of isPrimary:true and then launch a function with the GUID that is in that item.
I have a webservice whos JSON defines available Accounts with a display name and a GUID this generates a dropdown select list that calls a function with the GUID included to return full data from a web service.
In the scenario where theres only 1 OPTION I dont show the SELECT and simply call the function with the single GUID to return the data from the service. If theres no options I dont show anything other than a message.
Code below shows what I currently have.
The Spec has now changed and the data they are sending me in the first service call which defines that select list is now including a property isPrimary:true on one of the JSON object along with its GUID as per the rest
I now need to change my interface to no longer use the SELECT list and instead fire the function call to the service for the item that contains the isPrimary:true property. However there may be multiple instances where isPrimary:true exists in the returning JSON so I just want to fire the function on the first found instance of isPrimary:true
Equally if that property isnt in any of the JSON items then just fire the function on the first item in the JSON.
My current Code is below - you can see the call to retrieve the full details is from function:
vm.retrieveAccount(GUID);
Where the GUID is supplied with each JSON object
Code is:
if (data.Accounts.length > 1) {
vm.hideAcc = false;
setBusyState(false);
//wait for the user to make a selection
} else if (data.Accounts.length == 1){
vm.hideAcc = true;
// Only 1 acc - no need for drop down get first item
vm.accSelected = data.Accounts[0].UniqueIdentifier;
vm.retrieveAccount(vm.accSelected);
} else {
// Theres no accounts
// Hide Drop down and show message
setBusyState(false);
vm.hideAcc = true;
setMessageState(false, true, "There are no Accounts")
}
Sample of new JSON structure
accName: "My Acc",
isPrimary: true,
GUID: "bg111010101"
Still think that's a weird spec, but simple enough to solve. Just step through the array and return the first isPrimary match. If none are found, return the first element of the array.
var findPrimary = function(data) {
if (!(Array.isArray(data)) || data.length == 0) {
return false; // not an array, or empty array
}
for (var i=0; i<data.length; i++) {
if (data[i].isPrimary) {
return data[i]; // first isPrimary match
}
}
// nothing had isPrimary, so return the first one:
return data[0];
}
Related
I have a table that displays several entries, each has an <input>. The user can dynamically add additional inputs by clicking an "add entry" button. I need to iterate over them before saving and validate each one. I simplified my example to check that the value of each input is greater than 100 (ultimately I will use a pattern-match to validate MAC and IP addresses).
I can probably handle it if I could select all <input>s, but I would really like to select a specific <input> using an index I already have in my scope. I read that angular.element is a way, but I need to select something that was dynamically created, and thus not named something easy like id="myInput". Unless I use an id of "input" and append a unique number with Angular's $index in the id attribute?
Here is my Fiddle that shows what I'm doing. Line 44 is an if() that should check if any <input> is greater than 100. The "Save Row" button validates that the input is greater than 100, but if you edit a line, I need the "Save" button to validate any that the user has edited (by clicking Edit next to it).
tl;dr:
How can I use Angular to select an <input> that has been created dynamically?
I have updated your fiddle in a clean way so that you can maintain the validation in a generic method for both add & edit.
function validateBinding(binding) {
// Have your pattern-match validation here to validate MAC and IP addresses
return binding.ip > 100;
}
Updated fiddle:
https://jsfiddle.net/balasuar/by0tg92m/27/
Also, I have fixed the current issue with editing you have to allow multiple editing without save the first row when clicking the next edit on next row.
The validation of 'save everything' is now cleaner in angular way as below.
$scope.changeEdit = function(binding) {
binding.onEdit = true;
//$scope.editNum = newNum;
$scope.showSave = true;
};
$scope.saveEverything = function() {
var error = false;
angular.forEach($scope.macbindings, function(binding) {
if(binding.onEdit) {
if (validateBinding(binding)) {
binding.onEdit = false;
} else {
error = true;
}
}
});
if (error) {
alert("One/some of the value you are editing need to be greater than 100");
} else {
$scope.showSave = false;
}
}
You can check the updated fiddle for the same,
https://jsfiddle.net/balasuar/by0tg92m/27/
Note: As you are using angular, you can validate the model as above and no need to retrieve and loop the input elements for the validation. Also for your case, validating the model is sufficient.
If you need some advanced validation, you should create a custom
directive. Since, playing around with the elements inside the
controller is not recommended in AngularJS.
You can use a custom class for those inputs you want to validate. Then you can select all those inputs with that class and validate them. See this Fiddle https://jsfiddle.net/lealceldeiro/L38f686s/5/
$scope.saveEverything = function() {
var inputs = document.getElementsByClassName('inputCtrl'); //inputCtrl is the class you use to select those input s you want to validate
$scope.totalInputs = inputs.length;
$scope.invalidCount = 0;
for (var i = 0; i < inputs.length; i++){
if(inputs[i].value.length < 100){
$scope.invalidCount++;
}
}
//do your stuff here
}
On line 46 a get all the inputs with class "classCtrl" and then I go through the input s array in order to check their length.
There you can check if any of them is actually invalid (by length or any other restriction)
I am currently working on an AngularJS project in which I have to get project information, for a specific month and year, from the server and show them to the user.
First of all I'm getting a list of Project Id's (projectList), which can be variable, and then I need to get the info on those projects for a specific year and month. With this code I'm trying to get the data and to refresh the data when the last projects is successful. After the data is fetched, I use a ng-repeat to show it to the user.
$scope.getData = function(){
$scope.projectInfoList = [];
for(var index=0; index < $scope.projectList.length; index++){
projectService.getProject($scope.model.year, $scope.model.month, parseInt($scope.projectList[index]) ).success(function(data){
var listInput = { projectID : $scope.projectList[index], data : data};
$scope.projectInfoList.push(listInput);
if(index == $scope.projectList.length - 1){
$scope.$apply();
}
});
};
}
This has 2 mistakes.
It adds only data to the last index.
It doesn't refresh the data immediately when I request data for another month or year
I have looked for solutions with $q.all but I'm not sure how I would use it together with variable amount of functions of 'projectService.getProject(..)'
The anonymous callback that you give to the function success use a closure to the variable index.
But, your anonymous callback will be called asynchronously (when the call will be done). So when it will be called when index will be the last index of the array (so here $scope.projectList.length - 1).
To avoid that, you can use the following pattern:
for(var index=0; index < $scope.projectList.length; index++){
(function (index) {
projectService.getProject($scope.model.year, $scope.model.month, parseInt($scope.projectList[index]) ).success(function(data){
var listInput = { projectID : $scope.projectList[index], data : data};
$scope.projectInfoList.push(listInput);
if(index == $scope.projectList.length - 1){
$scope.$apply();
}
});
})(index)
}
Your second mistake is probably because you change the reference of the array projectInfoList in your function with $scope.projectInfoList = [];.
Take a look at this post for more details on this last problem: ng-repeat not updating on update of array
Inside my controller, I would like to filter an array of objects. Each of these objects is a map which can contain strings as well as lists
I tried using $filter('filter')(array, function) format but I do not know how to access the individual elements of the array inside my function. Here is a snippet to show what I want.
$filter('filter')(array, function() {
return criteriaMatch(item, criteria);
});
And then in the criteriaMatch(), I will check if each of the individual property matches
var criteriaMatch = function(item, criteria) {
// go thro each individual property in the item and criteria
// and check if they are equal
}
I have to do all these in the controller and compile a list of lists and set them in the scope. So I do need to access the $filter('filter') this way only. All the examples I found in the net so far have static criteria searches inside the function, they don't pass an criteria object and test against each item in the array.
You can use it like this:
http://plnkr.co/edit/vtNjEgmpItqxX5fdwtPi?p=preview
Like you found, filter accepts predicate function which accepts item
by item from the array.
So, you just have to create an predicate function based on the given criteria.
In this example, criteriaMatch is a function which returns a predicate
function which matches the given criteria.
template:
<div ng-repeat="item in items | filter:criteriaMatch(criteria)">
{{ item }}
</div>
scope:
$scope.criteriaMatch = function( criteria ) {
return function( item ) {
return item.name === criteria.name;
};
};
Here's an example of how you'd use filter within your AngularJS JavaScript (rather than in an HTML element).
In this example, we have an array of Country records, each containing a name and a 3-character ISO code.
We want to write a function which will search through this list for a record which matches a specific 3-character code.
Here's how we'd do it without using filter:
$scope.FindCountryByCode = function (CountryCode) {
// Search through an array of Country records for one containing a particular 3-character country-code.
// Returns either a record, or NULL, if the country couldn't be found.
for (var i = 0; i < $scope.CountryList.length; i++) {
if ($scope.CountryList[i].IsoAlpha3 == CountryCode) {
return $scope.CountryList[i];
};
};
return null;
};
Yup, nothing wrong with that.
But here's how the same function would look, using filter:
$scope.FindCountryByCode = function (CountryCode) {
// Search through an array of Country records for one containing a particular 3-character country-code.
// Returns either a record, or NULL, if the country couldn't be found.
var matches = $scope.CountryList.filter(function (el) { return el.IsoAlpha3 == CountryCode; })
// If 'filter' didn't find any matching records, its result will be an array of 0 records.
if (matches.length == 0)
return null;
// Otherwise, it should've found just one matching record
return matches[0];
};
Much neater.
Remember that filter returns an array as a result (a list of matching records), so in this example, we'll either want to return 1 record, or NULL.
Hope this helps.
Additionally, if you want to use the filter in your controller the same way you do it here:
<div ng-repeat="item in items | filter:criteriaMatch(criteria)">
{{ item }}
</div>
You could do something like:
var filteredItems = $scope.$eval('items | filter:filter:criteriaMatch(criteria)');
You can get the child count via
firebase_node.once('value', function(snapshot) { alert('Count: ' + snapshot.numChildren()); });
But I believe this fetches the entire sub-tree of that node from the server. For huge lists, that seems RAM and latency intensive. Is there a way of getting the count (and/or a list of child names) without fetching the whole thing?
The code snippet you gave does indeed load the entire set of data and then counts it client-side, which can be very slow for large amounts of data.
Firebase doesn't currently have a way to count children without loading data, but we do plan to add it.
For now, one solution would be to maintain a counter of the number of children and update it every time you add a new child. You could use a transaction to count items, like in this code tracking upvodes:
var upvotesRef = new Firebase('https://docs-examples.firebaseio.com/android/saving-data/fireblog/posts/-JRHTHaIs-jNPLXOQivY/upvotes');
upvotesRef.transaction(function (current_value) {
return (current_value || 0) + 1;
});
For more info, see https://www.firebase.com/docs/transactions.html
UPDATE:
Firebase recently released Cloud Functions. With Cloud Functions, you don't need to create your own Server. You can simply write JavaScript functions and upload it to Firebase. Firebase will be responsible for triggering functions whenever an event occurs.
If you want to count upvotes for example, you should create a structure similar to this one:
{
"posts" : {
"-JRHTHaIs-jNPLXOQivY" : {
"upvotes_count":5,
"upvotes" : {
"userX" : true,
"userY" : true,
"userZ" : true,
...
}
}
}
}
And then write a javascript function to increase the upvotes_count when there is a new write to the upvotes node.
const functions = require('firebase-functions');
const admin = require('firebase-admin');
admin.initializeApp(functions.config().firebase);
exports.countlikes = functions.database.ref('/posts/$postid/upvotes').onWrite(event => {
return event.data.ref.parent.child('upvotes_count').set(event.data.numChildren());
});
You can read the Documentation to know how to Get Started with Cloud Functions.
Also, another example of counting posts is here:
https://github.com/firebase/functions-samples/blob/master/child-count/functions/index.js
Update January 2018
The firebase docs have changed so instead of event we now have change and context.
The given example throws an error complaining that event.data is undefined. This pattern seems to work better:
exports.countPrescriptions = functions.database.ref(`/prescriptions`).onWrite((change, context) => {
const data = change.after.val();
const count = Object.keys(data).length;
return change.after.ref.child('_count').set(count);
});
```
This is a little late in the game as several others have already answered nicely, but I'll share how I might implement it.
This hinges on the fact that the Firebase REST API offers a shallow=true parameter.
Assume you have a post object and each one can have a number of comments:
{
"posts": {
"$postKey": {
"comments": {
...
}
}
}
}
You obviously don't want to fetch all of the comments, just the number of comments.
Assuming you have the key for a post, you can send a GET request to
https://yourapp.firebaseio.com/posts/[the post key]/comments?shallow=true.
This will return an object of key-value pairs, where each key is the key of a comment and its value is true:
{
"comment1key": true,
"comment2key": true,
...,
"comment9999key": true
}
The size of this response is much smaller than requesting the equivalent data, and now you can calculate the number of keys in the response to find your value (e.g. commentCount = Object.keys(result).length).
This may not completely solve your problem, as you are still calculating the number of keys returned, and you can't necessarily subscribe to the value as it changes, but it does greatly reduce the size of the returned data without requiring any changes to your schema.
Save the count as you go - and use validation to enforce it. I hacked this together - for keeping a count of unique votes and counts which keeps coming up!. But this time I have tested my suggestion! (notwithstanding cut/paste errors!).
The 'trick' here is to use the node priority to as the vote count...
The data is:
vote/$issueBeingVotedOn/user/$uniqueIdOfVoter = thisVotesCount, priority=thisVotesCount
vote/$issueBeingVotedOn/count = 'user/'+$idOfLastVoter, priority=CountofLastVote
,"vote": {
".read" : true
,".write" : true
,"$issue" : {
"user" : {
"$user" : {
".validate" : "!data.exists() &&
newData.val()==data.parent().parent().child('count').getPriority()+1 &&
newData.val()==newData.GetPriority()"
user can only vote once && count must be one higher than current count && data value must be same as priority.
}
}
,"count" : {
".validate" : "data.parent().child(newData.val()).val()==newData.getPriority() &&
newData.getPriority()==data.getPriority()+1 "
}
count (last voter really) - vote must exist and its count equal newcount, && newcount (priority) can only go up by one.
}
}
Test script to add 10 votes by different users (for this example, id's faked, should user auth.uid in production). Count down by (i--) 10 to see validation fail.
<script src='https://cdn.firebase.com/v0/firebase.js'></script>
<script>
window.fb = new Firebase('https:...vote/iss1/');
window.fb.child('count').once('value', function (dss) {
votes = dss.getPriority();
for (var i=1;i<10;i++) vote(dss,i+votes);
} );
function vote(dss,count)
{
var user='user/zz' + count; // replace with auth.id or whatever
window.fb.child(user).setWithPriority(count,count);
window.fb.child('count').setWithPriority(user,count);
}
</script>
The 'risk' here is that a vote is cast, but the count not updated (haking or script failure). This is why the votes have a unique 'priority' - the script should really start by ensuring that there is no vote with priority higher than the current count, if there is it should complete that transaction before doing its own - get your clients to clean up for you :)
The count needs to be initialised with a priority before you start - forge doesn't let you do this, so a stub script is needed (before the validation is active!).
write a cloud function to and update the node count.
// below function to get the given node count.
const functions = require('firebase-functions');
const admin = require('firebase-admin');
admin.initializeApp(functions.config().firebase);
exports.userscount = functions.database.ref('/users/')
.onWrite(event => {
console.log('users number : ', event.data.numChildren());
return event.data.ref.parent.child('count/users').set(event.data.numChildren());
});
Refer :https://firebase.google.com/docs/functions/database-events
root--|
|-users ( this node contains all users list)
|
|-count
|-userscount :
(this node added dynamically by cloud function with the user count)
I'd like to be able to search model attributes contained within a backbonejs collection. This is how I do it now...
wherePartial: function(attrs) {
// this method is really only tolerant of string values. you can't do partial
// matches on objects, but you can compare a list of strings. If you send it a list
// of values; attrs={keyA:[1,2,3],keyB:1}, etc the code will loop through the entire
// attrs obj and look for a match. strings are partially matched and if a list is found
// it's expected that it contains a list of string values. The string values should be considered
// to be like an OR operation in a query. Non-list items are like an AND.
if (_.isEmpty(attrs)) return [];
var matchFound = false;
return this.filter(function(model) {
// this is in the outer for loop so that a function isn't created on each iteration
function listComparator(value, index, list){
return model.get(key).toLowerCase().indexOf(value.toLowerCase()) >= 0;
}
for (var key in attrs) {
if (_.isArray(attrs[key])){
matchFound = _.any(attrs[key],listComparator);
if (matchFound !== true) return false;
} else {
matchFound = model.get(key).toLowerCase().indexOf(attrs[key].toLowerCase()) >= 0;
if (matchFound === false) return false;
}
}
return true;
});
}
Assume "C" is an instantiated collection, this is how I use it:
name:joe (nickname:joe the man nickname:joe cool nickname:joey)
is typed into a textbox and converted into this:
C.wherePartial({name:"joe",nicknames:["joe the man","joe cool","joey"]})
The above method returns all models that have the name joe and within that scope, any of the models that have the name joe and any of the nicknames. It works well for what I use it for. However, I'd really like to make a search that doesn't require the key:value pattern. I'd like to do this in a search box like when using a search engine on the web. I thought about just looking at every attribute on each model, but that takes awhile when you have a large collection (160k+ models).
Has anyone come across a need like this in the past? If so, how did you solve it? I'd like to keep the search contained on the client and not use any ajax calls to the backend. The reason for this is that the entire collection is already loaded on the client.
I thought of a way to do it. Serialize the attributes to a string during model instantiation. Listen for updates and update the serialization.
serializeAttr: function(){
this.serializedAttr = "";
var self = this;
_.each(this.toJSON(),function(value, key, list){
self.serializedAttr += value;
});
}
Then I can do simple searches on that cached value:
cc.serializedAttr.toLowerCase().indexOf("joe") >= 0