I'm getting a strange error that I can't for the life of me crack.
I'm coding a card game and I have two tables of different lengths. One links entries to functions, and the other holds the played cards. The first table is for attributes that certain cards in the deck have.
ATTRIBUTES = {
Reset = RuleBook.Do_Reset,
Go_Lower= RuleBook.Do_Go_Lower,
Mirror = RuleBook.Do_Mirror}
The way these functions are called is as follows:
ATTRIBUTES[cardPile[#cardPile].Attribute]()
I've printed out of contents of both the card object and the ATTRIBUTES table and both are completely in tact. Cards that have an attribute have a table entry under Attribute for a function, and those link up to the Do_... functions. Yet the above line of code doesn't appear to work. If anyone has ideas or suggestions they'd be appreciated.
Lua lets you basically use any kind of lua value as a key in a table. The problem with your code above is that your ATTRIBUTE table uses strings as the key but cardPile[#cardPile].Attribute is a function NOT a string.
When you perform the lookup here:
ATTRIBUTES[cardPile[#cardPile].Attribute]()
You're saying lookup the corresponding value in ATTRIBUTES having the key cardPile[#cardPile].Attribute which is a function. Your ATTRIBUTES table as you have it defined only contain strings as keys -- it has no functions as keys so nil is returned.
Two possible fixes for this:
Assuming cardPile's Attribute field already refers to the function you want, you can just call it like this:
cardPile[#cardPile].Attribute()
The alternative is to change how you setup card_obj's Attribute field -- make it refer to a string instead of the the function:
function Card.Create(Suit, Number, Name)
local card_obj = {}
-- ...
if( card_obj.number == 1 ) then
card_obj.Attribute = "Reset"
elseif( card_obj.number == 6 ) then
card_obj.Attribute = "Go_Lower"
-- ... etc.
else
card_obj.Attribute = nil;
end
end
Related
Say I have multiple tables in {game} like {bullets}, where {bullets} has multiple tables as found below. How would I iterate through and call all the update functions contained in {game}?
--Below is a simplified example, Assume each table in {bullets} has multiple entries not just update. And that the final code must work in cases like game={bullets,coins,whatever}, each entry being of similar nature to bullets.
game={}
game.bullets={{update=function(self) end,...}, {update=function(self) end,...},...}
for obj in all(game) do
for things in all(obj) do
things:update() end end
--I'm not sure what I"m doing wrong and whether I even need a double for-loop.
--if bullets wasn't embedded in {game} it would just be:
for obj in all(bullets) do
obj:update()
end
I've also tried:
for obj in all(game.bullets) do
obj:update()
end
*correction: this works, the problem I want solved though is to make this work if I have multiple tables like {bullets} in {game}. Thus the first attempt at double iterations which failed. So rather than repeat the above as many times as I have items in {game}, I want to type a single statement.
all() isn't a standard function in Lua. Is that a helper function you found somewhere?
Hard to tell without seeing more examples, or documentation showing how it's used, with expected return values. Seems to be an iterator, similar in nature to pairs(). Possibly something like this:
for key, value in pairs( game ) do
for obj in all( value ) do
obj :update()
end
end
I want to make the custom filter dynamic. So, for writing future code I could pass in a list of references to each field object in the table.
That way I do not have to hardcode data.(field name here). Instead, it would work off the list of properties of the column object.
I know there ways to get the field normally but they are always returned as strings not object references. This obviously will not work with the dot operator.
I have some success with using JSON.parse followed by looping through the entries. But like before it returns the field as a string instead of a reference.
So is there a way to retrieve the column fields as objects and if so how?
I tried using the getColumns but I am still getting undefined when grabbing the fields. There is something wrong with my code.
function customFilter(data, filterParams) {
//data - the data for the row being filtered
//filterParams - params object passed to the filter
for (column of table.getColumns()){
field = column.getField();
console.log(data.field);
}
}
You speak about references in your question, but references to what? the field names themselves arent references to anything, they simply show Tabulator how to access the underlying row data, without a specific row data object to reference, there isn't anything to build any references from
You can only have a reference if it points to something, but there is nothing for the field definitions to point to without the row data.
If you are looking to have objects that you can manipulate the the getColumns function returns an array of Column Components with each component having a range of functions that can be called to manipulate that column. including the getField function that returns the field for that column.
Given that the Tabulator filter functions will accept the filed names with dot notation that shouldnt be an issue at all, but you can also pass the column component directly into the filter, so it shouldnt be a problem their either
I've recently started working in lua. I'm trying to create function in which I needd to create a composite key consisting of 2 elements which should occur only once together. They can occur multiple times but with different combinations. One combination should be unique. Suggest me what data structure I should go for and how?
I'd suggest you to go with a table where your key is the actual position in the table.
as in:
my_super_duper_key = key1..key2
my_super_duper_key2 = key2..key1
if table[my_super_duper_key] == nil and table[my_super_duper_key2] == nil then
table[my_super_duper_key] = true
table[my_super_duper_key2] = true
end
If your keys are always in the same order or if it's a different key depending which is first you can throw the _key2 out of it... :)
I'm having a strange issue.
I created a model observer for my user model. The model observer is being run at 'saving'. when I dump the object at the very end of the user model to be displayed ( this is just before it saves.. according to laravel docs ) it displays all the attributes set correctly for the object, I've even seen an error that showed the correct attributes as set and being inserted into my database table. However, after the save has been completed and I query the database, two of the fields are not saved into the table.
There is no code written by myself sitting between the point where I dumped the attributes to check that they had been set and the save operation to the database. so I have no idea what could be causing this to happen. All the names are set correctly, and like I said, the attributes show as being inserted into the database, they just never end up being saved, I receive no error messages and only two out of ten attributes aren't being saved.
In my searches I have found many posts detailing that the $fillable property should be set, or issues relating to a problem with variables being misnamed or unset, however because I already have the specific attributes not being saved specified in the $fillable array, on top of the fact that they print out exactly as expected pre save, I don't believe those issues are related to the problem I am experiencing.
to save I'm calling:
User::create(Input::all());
and then the observer that handles the data looks like this:
class UserObserver {
# a common key between the city and state tables, helps to identify correct city
$statefp = State::where('id',$user->state_id)->pluck('statefp');
# trailing zeros is a function that takes the first parameter and adds zeros to make sure
# that in this case for example, the dates will be two characters with a trailing zero,
# based on the number specified in the second parameter
$user->birth_date = $user->year.'-'.$user->trailingZeros( $user->month, 2 ).'-'.$user->trailingZeros( $user->day, 2 );
if(empty($user->city)){
$user->city_id = $user->defaultCity;
}
$user->city_id = City::where( 'statefp', $statefp )->where('name', ucfirst($user->city_id))->pluck('id');
# if the user input zip code is different then suggested zip code then find location data
# on the input zip code input by the user from the geocodes table
if( $user->zip !== $user->defaultZip ){
$latlon = Geocode::where('zip', $user->zip)->first();
$user->latitude = $latlon['latitude'];
$user->longitude = $latlon['longitude'];
}
unset($user->day);
unset($user->month);
unset($user->year);
unset($user->defaultZip);
unset($user->defaultCity);
}
that is the code for the two values that aren't being set, when I run
dd($user);
all the variables are set correctly, and show up in the mysql insert attempt screen with correct values, but they do not persist past that point.. it seems to me that possibly mysql is rejecting the values for the city_id and the birth_date. However, I cannot understand why, or whether it is a problem with Laravel or mysql.
since I was calling
User::create();
I figured I'd try to have my observer listen to:
creating();
I'm not sure why it only effected the date and city variables, but changing the function to listen at creating() instead of saving() seems to have solved my problem.
I wanted to ask what's the difference between the value in the adressline and the id I get when i use getId().
For example for one document the getId() value is:
t8K_TLQPmKzgB72pY4TblUg
while in the adressline the key is:
0Amu7sNvd2IoudDhLX1RMUVBtS3pnQjcycFk0VGJsVWc
what i figured out so far is that when you encode getId in base64 you get more or less the last part of the key in the adressline
(base64Encode(t8K_TLQPmKzgB72pY4TblUg) = dDhLX1RMUVBtS3pnQjcycFk0VGJsVWc=).
But I still don't know what 0Amu7sNvd2Iou stands for, because i have the impression that this parts also is different in older documents, therefore i can't just combine the key using all the time 0Amu7sNvd2Iou at the beginning
Why I need to know this: my scripts use the getId method but some users fill in their ids manually (they just copypaste it from the key from the adressline). The result is that when i try to compare them although they refer to the same document i can't match them like they are completly different...
thanks a lot for bringing light into this problem
edit #taras:
i can also open the document with the key and the id. It's just weird that there are kind of two different id's for one document. If for example i want to compare if a value somebody copypasted from the adressline to a document is the same as the file i have opened i won't get a true, even it is the same file
var keyFromHeadline = "0Amu7sNvd2IoudDhLX1RMUVBtS3pnQjcycFk0VGJsVWc"
var id = SpreadsheetApp.getActiveSpreadsheet.getId();
if (keyFromHeadline==id) Browser.msgBox("blabla")
Therefore i would be interested what is the reason for the two different values and how i could match them
If you need to have unique file IDs just normalize them. Everytime a user enters an ID manually just run it trough the fileIdNormalize function:
function fileIdNormalize(id) {
if (typeof id == 'string' && id.length > 0)
return DocsList.getFileById(id).getId();
return '';
}
Just a suggestion :
Since base64Encode seems to give you a significative part of the adress url you could use a match to check if the document is the same.
Something like :
if('manually_entered_key'.match(base64Encode('the_value_obtained_by_getId')==base64Encode('the_value_obtained_by_getId')){
// consider as the same doc ...