Does anyone have a regex that can be used to validate that a query to be sent to lucene is is well formatted?
https://github.com/praized/lucene-query-validator/blob/master/src/luceneQueryValidator.js
This is a JavaScript attempt. I have not verified it's success but from reviewing the code, everything looks legit.
If you're allowing your users to enter in free text, there is always the chance that they'll mistype a field name (i.e. naem:Bob instead of name:Bob ). This validator will not catch issues like that.
I've created a js AMD module here: https://github.com/grahamscott/lucene-validator-amd-module
It's based on the praized module above, but is easier to integrate client-side, and doesn't rely on window.alert()
Related
I'm creating a route using the Java DSL in Camel.
I'd like to perform a text substitution without creating a new processor or bean.
I have this:
.setHeader(MY_THING,
constant(my_template.replace("{id1}", simple("${header.subs_val}").getText())))
If I don't add 'constant' I get type mismatch errors. If I don't put getText() on the simple() part, I get text mismatch answers. When I run my route, it replaces {id} with the literal ${header.subs_val} instead of fetching my value from the header. Yet if I take the quotes off, I get compile errors; Java doesn't know the ${...} syntax of course.
Deployment takes a few minutes, so experiments are expensive.
So, how can I just do a simple substitution. Nothing I am finding on the web actually seems to work.
EDIT - what is the template? Specifically, a string (it's a URL)
http://this/that/{id1}/another/thing
I've inherited some code, so I am unable to simply to(...) the URL and apply the special .tof() (??) formatting.
Interesting case!
If you place my_template in a header you could use a nested simple expression(Camel 2.9 onwards) like in the example below. I am also setting a value to subs_val for the example, but I suppose your header has already a value in the route.
.setHeader("my_template", constant("http://this/that/{id1}/another/thing"))
.setHeader("subs_val",constant("22"))
.setHeader("MY_THING",simple("${in.header.my_template.replaceAll(\"\\{id1.?\",${in.header.subs_val.toString()})}"))
After this step header MY_THING has the value http://this/that/22/another/thing.
1)In this example I could skip to_String() but I do not know what's the type of your header "subs_val" .
2) I tried first with replaceAll(\"\{id1\"}\") but it didn't work with } Probably this is a bug...Will look at it again. That's why in my regex I used .?
3) When you debug your application inside a processor, where the exchange is available you can use SimpleBuilder to evaluate a simple expression easily in your IDE, without having to restart your app
SimpleBuilder.simple("${in.header.url.replaceAll(\"\\{id1.?\",${in.header.subs_val.toString()})}").evaluate(exchange, String.class);
Hope it helped :)
Just tried GAE(1.7.7 Java) Full Text Search and found if the search string is work, surprisingly it will not match working, worked, or hardworking, homework, I'd like to know if i miss something in the API, i read the tutorial but did not found any document about this except plural match.
Thanks.
P.S. I tried unit test for search service, not in working environment.
Tucked away in the docs (but unfortunately not in the table of operators), there is a '~' operator
To search for plural variants of an exact query, use the ~ operator:
~"car" # searches for "car" and "cars"
Not sure how far that will get you. Unfortunately thats about it.
See https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/java/search/overview#Queries_on_Fields
There is so little documentation on this,but just having tried it, it just works on plurals.
One approach would be to do your own stemming on the words in the document, (though you wouldn't return that as the text ;-) Then you could perform stemming on your search term and be able to match worked, working etc..
This is a late answer, but to follow up the previous answer, what you want to do is not possible with the basic API functions. The search API works on full-text searching principles. To get around this you can tokenise your searchable data pre-index and store this in a field with the relevant document.
See: Partial matching GAE search API
I've taken a reCaptcha plugin from this guy
(github link of the plugin)
I've entered the following code form in my view:
[form creation]
[table]
[inputs]
[/table]
echo $this->Recaptcha->show(array('theme' => 'white'));
echo $this->Recaptcha->error();
[/form]
I've followed the steps suggested, and the reCaptcha window appears properly, but no matter what I enter in the captcha, it never gets verified and I always receive the 'message' field of beforeValidate (I've set it to "You've entered a wrong message" etc).
I'm not even sure how to debug it to see at which point it fails. Even if I just replace all the code in checkRecaptcha function with "return true" to try and skip the validation with the keys and just see if the rule itself is correct, it still remains the same, and I'm generally not getting any of the specific incorrect-captcha-sol messages that I read around.
Am I correct to assume that the only code I need inside my controller function (assuming I've already included the component and helper in the controller) is Configure::load('Recaptcha.key'); and no further manual validation checks?
(unfortunately I can't link you my whole project due to rights)
I had a similar issue. Try removing the 2 response and challenge field lines in the component and overwrite them with these:
$controller->$modelClass->set('recaptcha_response_field',
$controller->request->data['recaptcha_response_field']);
$controller->$modelClass->set('recaptcha_challenge_field',
$controller->request->data['recaptcha_challenge_field']);
Okay, this is driving me nuts. I’m working through the IBM CakePHP Tutorial, and in the first part, I’m at the section where the author is introducing validation rules for form input:
www.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/tutorials/os-php-cake1/section5.html#N107E3
For the life of me, I can’t figure out what’s happening in this line of code:
$this->invalidate('username_unique');
According to the CakePHP documentation, the Model::invalidate() method takes as its first parameter a string that specifiies “The name of the field to invalidate”. How is “username_unique” the name of the field to validate? Looks to me like it should be just plain old “username”. But incredibly enough, the author’s code works, and mine doesn’t when I change “username_unique” to “username” (or even “User.username”), so I’m thinking there might be a serious flaw in the documentation (or very possibly, with me).
[FWIW, I can see that the CakePHP 1.25 provides a better means of doing validation, but I still find it troubling that what seems to be a well-documented method doesn't seem to be doing what it advertises, and I want to understand why the tutorial code works.]
Can anyone shed any light on this?
The "magic" is actually in the $form in this case.
When calling $this->invalidate('username_unique'), Cake takes a note that the field username_unique is invalid. The fact that this field does not actually exist is irrelevant.
Now, take another look at the actual $form field (slightly reformatted):
echo $form->input('username', array(
'after' => $form->error('username_unique', 'The username is taken. Please try again.')
));
It's outputting a normal form field, but "manually" places an error() output after the form field. $form->error('username_unique', $message) means "if there's an error for the field username_unique, output the message $message". So you're actually marking an imaginary field as invalid and are manually outputting an error message for this imaginary field.
And actually, that's a load of outdated cr*p you should forget right away. There's a built-in syntax for multiple validation rules per field, so you can test for character length and uniqueness at the same time and even get different error messages for each error type. There's even a built-in isUnique rule, so you won't even have to code a manual uniqueness test.
How does cakephp handle a get request? For instance, how would it handle a request like this...
http://us.mc01g.mail.yahoo.com/mc/welcome?.gx=1&.rand=9553121_pg=showFolder&fid=Inbox&order=down&tt=1732&pSize=20&.rand=425311406&.jsrand=3
Would "mc" be the controller and "welcome" be the action?
How is the rest of the information handled?
Also note that you could use named parameters as of Cake 1.2. Named parameters are in key:value order, so the url http://somesite.com/controller/action/key1:value1/key2:value2 would give a a $this->params['named'] array( 'key1' => 'value1', 'key2' => 'value2' ) from within any controller.
If you use a CNN.com style GET request (http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/books/04/27/ayn.rand.atlas.shrugged/index.html), the parameters are in order of appearance (2009, SHOWBIZ, books, etc.) in the $this->params['pass'] array, indexed starting at 0.
I strongly recommend named paramters, as you can later add features by passing get params, without having to worry about the order. I believe you can also change the named parameter separation key (by default, it's ':').
So it's a slightly different paradigm than the "traditional" GET parameters (page.php?key1=value1&key2=value2). However, you could easily add some logic in the application to automatically parse traditional parameters into an array by tying into how the application parses requests.
CakePHP uses routes to determine this. By default, the routes work as you described. The remainder after the '?' is the querystring and it can be found in $this->params['url'] in the controller, parsed into an associative array.
Since I found this while searching for it, even though it's a little old.
$this->params['url']
holds GET information.
I have tested but it does work. The page in the Cakephp book for it is this link under the 'url' section. It even gives an example very similar to the one in the original question here. This also works in CakePHP 1.3 which is what I'm running.
It doesn't really use the get in the typical since.
if it was passed that long crazy string, nothing would happen. It expects data in this format: site.com/controller/action/var1/var2/var....
Can someone clarify the correct answer? It appears to me that spoulson's and SeanDowney's statements are contradicting each other?
Would someone be able to use the newest version of CakePHP and get the following url to work:
http://www.domain.com/index.php/oauth/authorize?oauth_version=1.0&oauth_nonce=c255c8fdd41bd3096e0c3bf0172b7b5a&oauth_timestamp=1249169700&oauth_consumer_key=8a001709e6552888230f88013f23d5d004a7445d0&oauth_signature_method=HMAC-SHA1&oauth_signature=0bj5O1M67vCuvpbkXsh7CqMOzD0%3D
oauth being the controller and authorize being a method AS WELL as it being able to accept the GET request at the end?