As I must to add image on several group on the same form, I'd to customize my procédure to do that.
Indeed, actualy, I have something like that,
if(value=="17"){
gv17.addElement(imAc);
v17.setStyle("backgroundColor",'#ffffff');
}
My goal is to do something like that:
if(value=="18"){
gv18.addElement(imAc);
v18.setStyle("backgroundColor",'#ffffff');
}
if(value=="17"){
gv17.addElement(imAc);
v17.setStyle("backgroundColor",'#ffffff');
}
if(value=="16"){
gv16.addElement(imAc);
v16.setStyle("backgroundColor",'#ffffff');
}
Do you have a solution to solve that.
Indeed, I think it's stupid to write X times (3 in example) to do that. I can refer to object by Name as name is a string.
I'd like to do something like that :
var mytarget:string = "gv16";
mytarget.addElement(imAc);
Thanks
Depending on how your objects are named, you might try:
this['gv' + value].addElement(imAc);
this['v' + value].setStyle('backgroundColor', '#ffffff');
As long as your value number equates to the symbol name numbers, and the logic holds true for every element, this should solve your problem without getting overly complex.
Related
So, I need a button that would add a new ListElement to existing list. I need to fill in one value, taken from TextField. I have no idea how to do this. I tried something like
onClicked:{
nameOfList.append(JSON.parse([nameOfList.nameOfColumn,myTextField.text]));
}
Obviously it didn't work. Do I have to send these two values to C++, then make a QJsonObject and send it back, or is there an easier way?
While the question does not describe the type of nameOfList, I assume it is ListModel since the question is about adding a new ListElement. In that case, appending would be straightforward:
onClicked:{
nameOfList.append({"nameOfColumn": myTextField.text})}
}
However, if nameOfList.nameOfColumn is not constant, you'd need to make a temporary:
var temp = {}
temp[nameOfList.nameOfColumn] = myTextField.text
nameOfList.append(temp)
It can depend on what exactly nameOfList is, but here you will most probably find an answer.
Is dynamic variable naming like this possible in ActionScript 3?
for (var xz=0;xz<10;xz++){
var this['name' + xz]:Number = xz;
}
You should use an array for this kind of list of variables.
While you can create properties dynamically, you usually want to avoid it. Especially in your case, where the actual identifier of each variable is not a String, but a number. So why not use something that does exactly that: identify its elements by a number? And that's exactly what an array does.
code example:
var xzs:Array = [];
for (var xz:uint = 0; xz < 10; xz++){
xzs.push(xz);
}
Short answer is: no, you can't declare at runtime typed properties.
Long answer is: kinda.
If you want to create new typed properties you'll have to store them in a Vector<>.
Anything else would let you do it but untyped, dynamic class, store in object, store in array, etc ...
Yes, it sure is - AS3 comes from ECMA script, so this is setting a property to an object (in this case it's this). So you can dynamically set properties. But you are a little bit wrong about how to do it - there is no need to use var, because you don't declare it, you set it. It's like using:
this.propertyName = 'value';
From now on, this will have propertyName equal to 'value'. Therefore you should just use:
this['name' + xz] = xz;
That's all!
Edit: as BotMaster mentioned - if you are using classes and you want to dynamically add properties, the class must be set as dynamic. Most of the commonly used ones are already dynamic (as Aaron mentioned :)).
I didn't go into much details as I think you simply need to do this on your timeline. If not - please specify this in your question so that you can get more accurate answer than this one. The same goes if your new property needs to be typed (can't think of any point wanting this) - you should see BotMaster's answer :)
The children functions returns the set of the member.
But I need the children of several members.
The problem is, that I can't use Union to make it work like that:
Union([Geography].[Geography].[USA].children,[Geography].[Geography].[Canada].children)
I don't know how many member it will be... So I actually would need all children of a set of members.
like:
([Geography].[Geography].[USA],[Geography].[Geography].[Canada],[Geography].[Geography].[GB]).children
Is there a function like that?
I couldn't answer my question and so I just edit it. With the help of DHN's answer and some brain work I found a solution I could use:
Except(DRILLDOWNLEVEL( {[Geography].[Geography].[USA],[Geography].[Geography].[Canada]},,0 ),
{[Geography].[Geography].[USA],[Geography].[Geography].[Canada]})
That does work for me.
Explanation: I drilldown the elements the tool provides me, which returns children plus parents and then I use DHN's idea and except the parents so clean the list up a bit.
Hopefully it is understandable.
You can use the Descendants method (the fourth form of the description linked uses a set as its first argument. Thus,
Descendants( {
[Geography].[Geography].[USA],
[Geography].[Geography].[Canada],
[Geography].[Geography].[GB]
},
1,
SELF
)
should deliver exactly what you want.
Well actually, you could use a Crossjoin to get the set you want.
Something like
[Geography].[Geography].[USA] * [Geography].[Geography].[Canada] * [Geography].[Geography].[GB]
But this is only a proper solution, if you have only a few different search criteria.
Alternatively, you could use Except to remove those criteria you're not interested in. E.g.
Except([Geography].[Geography].children, [Geography].[Geography].[Germany])
This would give you the whole content of the [Geography] dimension, except the one of [Germany].
Hope this helps a bit.
Edit after comment of TO
Ok, this wasn't part of your question, but I think what you need is the MemberToStr() function. Please find the doc here.
I think something like this should do the trick.
with member [Measures].[Cities]
as membertostr([Geography].[Geography].members.children)
select [Measures].[Cities] on 0
from [WhatEverYourCubeNameIs]
where (
[Geography].[Geography].[USA],
[Geography].[Geography].[Canada]
)
Please note that this query is totally untested. I also may have lost some of my skills, because it's been a while, since I used mdx. You will also have to create the query dynamically, since the selection seems to be user dependant. But I'm sure that you're aware of it. ;)
I'm having a bit of trouble removing commas from an array when I go to write it to a cell in google spreadsheets. array.join(''); doesn't seem to do the trick. I would appreciate any help. Also, anchor[i][j].join('') returns an error.
Here is a bit of code:
anchor[i][j].join('') returns an error
anchor[i].join('') doesn't seem to have an effect.
for (var i=0; i(less than) rangeKW.length-2;i++){
anchor[i] = [];
for (var j=0; j<rangeURL.length;j++){
anchor[i][j] = ahref + rangeKW[i] + ahref1 + rangeURL[j] + "</a>|";
}
}
cell.setValue("{" + anchor);
}
Suppose you have
var x = [[1,2,3],[4,5,6]]
Then either of these lines will give you "123456":
Array.prototype.concat.apply([], x).join('')
x.map(function(a){ return a.join(''); }).join('');
The first one constructs the array [1,2,3,4,5,6] and then joins it. The second one joins each inner array first, constructing ["123", "456"] and then joins that. I think the first one is likely to be a tiny bit more efficient, although we are talking peanuts here, but the second one gives you a bit more control if you want to put something different between rows and columns.
In both cases, this doesn't change the original value in x. You can assign the new value to x if that's what you want.
array.join() works with "normal" arrays, by normal I mean 1 dimension and applies to the array itself, not on an single element (error on [i][j]), beside that I don't really understand what you want to do and how your code is related to your question ...
concerning anchor[i].join('');// doesn't seem to have an effect. I don't know how many elements are in there and how they look like but the syntax is correct. You can also use toString() if you want to make it a CSV string.
EDIT : (thanks for the information in comments.)
I think the easiest way (or at least the most clear) would be to create a couple of new variables that you could log separately to see exactly what happens.
for example
var anchorString = anchor[i].join(); // or toString() they both return strings from 1D arrays
Logger.log(anchorString)
if every index i of anchor have to be in the same cell then write it like this in the i-loop :
var anchorString += anchor[i].join();
Logger.log(anchorString)
well i created some variables in the main stage level, with something like this:
for(i=0,i<10,i++){
var var_name="var_num_"+i;
this[var_name]="some value";
}//<-----------------------------------------------------works
so i get 10 variables named "var_num0", "var_num1", "var_num2" each one with some value.
and i can acces them any where calling this
var second_var=MovieClip(root).var_num0;//<--------------works
my problem comes when i want to call all the variables from a lower level or in another frame or somewhere else using another loop:
var third_var;
for(j=0,j<3,j++){
third_var=this["MovieClip(root).var_num_"+j];//<---------DOSNT WORK
trace(this["MovieClip(root).var_num_"+j]);//<------------returns "undefined"
}
how can i make this work? i tried a lot of things and nothing...
thanks you all
In your case both "root" and "this" are the scope you want to access the vars from. so try this:
var third_var:MovieClip;
for(j = 0; j < 3; j++)
{
third_var = MovieClip(root)[var_num_ + j];
trace(third_var);
}
Also you should have semi-colons in your for loop rather than comers.
I'd like to preface my answer with a suggestion you use a 'Document Class' with AS3 to make things like namespaces and inheritance much clearer. You know exactly where things are accessible when using document based, object oriented programming versus the timeline programming available through the Flash IDE (its only there because of AS1/2). Tut: http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?223798-ActionScript-3-Tip-of-the-Day/page14
On to the answer: You are trying to move two levels of inheritance in one set of [] Another way of writing your first "Doesn't work" line is:
this.myMovieClip["var_num"+j"];
You could also use: this["MovieClip"]["var_num"+j];
Basically, you need to take the "MovieClip(root)" out of the string you are using to call your variable because you are passing through two levels of inheritance: this->MovieClip->targetVar
You need to use two periods, a period and a set square bracket or two sets square brackets to move two levels of inheritance. A period . and a set of square brackets [] both accomplish the task of moving one level deeper, so putting the . inside the string used to call up your variable won't work.
Explanation:
The following three examples all return the same variable:
myMovieClip.my_variable
myMovieClip["my_variable"]
var str:String = "my_variable";
myMovieClip[str];