i'd like to throw an argument error if a particular function doesn't work without a passed value that also happens to be a public constant of the class containing the function.
is there anyway to determine if a class owns a public constant instead of having to iterate thru all of them?
something like this:
public static const HALIFAX:String = "halifax";
public static const MONTREAL:String = "montreal";
public static const TORONTO:String = "toronto";
private var cityProperty:String;
public function set city(value:String):void
{
if (!this.hasConstant(value))
throw new ArgumentError("set city value is not applicable.");
cityProperty = value;
}
public function get city():Strig
{
return cityProperty;
}
currently, for this functionality i have to write the city setter function like this:
public function set city(value:String):void
{
if (value != HALIFAX && value != MONTREAL && value != TORONTO)
throw new ArgumentError("set city value is not applicable.");
cityProperty = value;
}
is this the only way to accomplish this task?
Yes, if you use reflections:
private var type:Class;
private var description:XML;
private function hasConstant (str : String ) : Boolean
{
if (description == null)
{
type = getDefinitionByName (getQualifiedClassName (this)) as Class;
description = describeType (type);
}
for each ( var constant:XML in description.constant)
{
if (type[constant.#name] == str) return true;
}
return false;
}
Note that for this to work, all constants must always be String objects declared public static const.
I was looking for an answer to this question myself and found it annoying that hasOwnProperty() did not work for static properties. Turns out though, that if you cast your class to a Class object, it does work.
Here's an example:
public final class DisplayMode
{
public static const one: String = "one";
public static const two: String = "two";
public static const three: String = "three";
public static function isValid(aDisplayMode: String): Boolean {
return Class(DisplayMode).hasOwnProperty(aDisplayMode);
}
}
I owe this solution to jimmy5804 from this discussion, so hats off to him.
You should be able to use bracket notation to do this. For example:
var foo:Sprite = new Sprite();
foo.rotation = 20;
trace( foo["x"], foo["rotation"]); // traces "0 20"
or more specific to your case:
var bar:String = "rotation";
trace( foo[bar] ); // traces "20"
The only thing you have to look out for here, is that the bracket accessor will throw a ReferenceError if you ask for an object property that isn't there, such as:
trace ( foo["cat"] ); // throws ReferenceError
But it will not throw if you are asking for a static property:
trace ( Sprite["cat"] ); // traces "undefined"
So in your case you might try:
if ( this[value] == undefined ) {
throw new ArgumentError("set city value is not applicable.");
}
EDIT:
Sorry, I was confusing the const's names with their values.
For this to work on your problem you would have to make the String value the same as the const's name, so for example:
public static const HALIFAX:String = "HALIFAX";
then you could use the query as described above and it would give you the desired result.
Related
I need to create some enum values, give it a default value and then compare it.
I have this enum class
public class Car
{
public static const Tesla:int = 1;
public static const Ford:int = 2;
}
How do I initiate a new Car enumn variable with a default value of "Tesla" and how do I compare the variable? I'm looking for something like this:
public var c:Car = new Car(Car.Tesla);
if (c == Car.Tesla){
// Do something
}
Edit, it is now changed to the following:
public final class Car
{
public static const Tesla:String = "tesla";
public static const Ford:String = "ford";
}
And in the mxml file:
public var c:String = Car.Tesla;
if (c == Car.Tesla){
// Do something
}
I have this enum class
Just so we're on the same page about it: that's not an enum and there are no enums in as3. The language doesn't have that feature.
How do I initiate a new Car enumn variable with a default value of "Tesla" and how do I compare the variable?
You cannot, because Car is a type and the static properties it has are of type int which is something completely different.
What you can do is this:
var c:int = Car.Tesla;
if (c == Car.Tesla){
// Do something
}
If you want to have a Car object instead, add a brand property to the class of type int, which you can then assign the value of your constants to:
var c:Car = new Car();
c.brand = Car.Tesla;
if (c.brand == Car.Tesla){
// Do something
}
You could also add a parameter to the constructor and insert the value there.
Btw. changing
public static const Tesla:int = 1;
to
public static const Tesla:String = "tesla";
will give you the chance to get more meaningful values during debugging. The built in constants like MouseEvent.CLICK are defined this way.
I`m tring to covert class to json.
The class is:
package com.globalData{
public class userSite {
private var uID:int,uName:String,uSocket:int,uZone:int,uRoom:int;
public function user(ID:int,Name:String,ZoneID:int,RoomID:int,socketID:int){
uID = ID;
uName = Name;
uSocket = socketID;
uZone = ZoneID;
uRoom = RoomID;
}
public function getName():String{
return uName;
}
public function getID():int{
return uID;
}
public function getZoneID():int{
return uZone;
}
public function getRoomID():int{
return uRoom;
}
public function getSocket():int{
return uSocket;
}
}
}
Im tryed to do:
json(Object(roomVar));
But its not work (JSOn is function on the main class)
Im need to convert the class to json and send the json -> Socket
How can i do it?
There are a few issues with your code above:
It doesn't appear as though your userSite class has a constructor. Instead, you've opted to have a user function that takes in all of the initialization arguments
You're using functions where you should probably be using accessor methods, sometimes called a getter.
public function getName():String { return uName;} would become public function get name():String { return uName;}
Instead of calling getName(), you would access name as a property: instance.name
You're attempting to pass an Object to the JSON.decode method, this method expects a String. Something like "{ 'a':1, 'b':[1,2,3] }" would be an acceptable parameter. This would return an object with two properties a and b, a would contain the value 1, and b would contain an array with the elements 1, 2, and 3. What you are looking for is actually the JSON.encode method which accepts an Object and converts it to a String (which can be parsed as JSON).
I suggest you convert all of your getXYZ() functions to accessors, this will allow an instance of that class to be read as a collection of properties, which will in turn allow the JSON.encode function to create a JSON string object from it:
package com.globalData
{
public class UserSite {
private var uID:int,uName:String,uSocket:int,uZone:int,uRoom:int;
public function UserSite(ID:int,Name:String,ZoneID:int,RoomID:int,socketID:int):void{
uID = ID;
uName = Name;
uSocket = socketID;
uZone = ZoneID;
uRoom = RoomID;
}
public function get name():String{
return uName;
}
public function get ID():int{
return uID;
}
public function get zoneID():int{
return uZone;
}
public function get roomID():int{
return uRoom;
}
public function get socket():int{
return uSocket;
}
}
}
Usage:
var roomVar:UserSite = new UserSite(1, 'Name', 2, 3, 4);
trace(JSON.encode(roomVar as Object));
Output:
{"ID":1,"name":"Name","socket":4,"roomID":3,"zoneID":2}
class Foo {
public function bar():void { ... }
}
var clazz:Class = Foo;
// ...enter the function (no Foo literal here)
var fun:Function = clazz["bar"]; // PROBLEM: returns null
// later
fun.call(new Foo(), ...);
What is the correct way to do the above? The Java equivalent of what I want to do is:
Method m = Foo.class.getMethod("bar", ...);
m.invoke(new Foo(), ...);
Actual code (with workaround):
class SerClass {
public var className:String;
public var name:String;
private var ser:String = null;
private var unser:Function = null;
public function SerClass(clazz:Class):void {
var type:XML = describeType(clazz);
className = type.#name;
// determine name
name = type.factory.metadata.(#name=="CompactType").arg.(#key=="name").#value;
// find unserializer
var mdesc:XML = XML(type.method.metadata.(#name=="Unserialize")).parent();
if (mdesc is XML) {
unser = clazz[mdesc.#name];
}
// find serializer
var sdesc:XML = XML(type.factory.method.metadata.(#name=="Serialize")).parent();
if (sdesc is XML) {
ser = sdesc.#name;
}
}
public function serialize(obj:Object, ous:ByteArray):void {
if (ser == null) throw new Error(name + " is not serializable");
obj[ser](ous);
}
public function unserialize(ins:ByteArray):Object {
if (unser == null) throw new Error(name + " is not unserializable");
return unser.call(null, ins);
}
}
Here the function bar only exist when your class is instanciated :
var foo:Foo = new Foo()
var fun:Function = foo.bar // <-- here you can get the function from the new instance
if you want to access it directlty you have to make it static:
class Foo {
public static function bar():void{ ... }
}
now you can access your function from the class Foo:
var fun:Function = Foo.bar
or
var clazz:Class = Foo
var fun:Function = clazz["bar"]
I am not sure about what you are intending to do.
However AS3Commons, especially the reflect package have API's that let you work with methods, instances and properties of a class.
There are also API methods to create instances of certain class types on the fly and call their respective methods.
Cheers
It's not
fun.call(new Foo(), ...);
Use instead since no parameters are required for the function
fun.call(clazz);
The first parameter as specified by adobe docs.
An object that specifies the value of thisObject within the function body.
[EDIT]
Forgot to point out you have to instantiate a non-static class with the "new" keyword.
var clazz:Class = new Foo();
[EDIT2]
Ok I played around and think I got what you want.
base.as
package{
public class Base {
public function Base() {
trace('Base constructor')
}
public function someFunc( ){
trace('worked');
}
}
}
//called with
var b:Base = new Base( );// note I am not type casting to Class
var func:Function = b.someFunc;
func.call( );
My workaround is to store the function name instead of the Function object.
var fun:String = "bar";
// later...
new Foo()[fun](...);
I have this ObjectType class which is a class to help me do something like this:
object.type = ObjectType.TWO
//ObjectType.as
package
{
public class ObjectType
{
public static var ONE:String = "one";
public static var TWO:String = "two";
public static var THREE:String = "three";
public function ObjectType()
{
}
}
}
Let's suppose I'm creating a new class and I need a property named type. In that property set function I want to make sure that it's value is one of the ObjectType variables. How can I achieve this?
public function set type(value:String):void
{
for (var o:Object in ObjectType) {
if (value == o)
this._type = value;
} else {
//error
}
}
}
Not performance aware but without modifying anything you can use describeType function to check the static field and get the value back:
function valueInClass(clazz:Class, value:*):Boolean {
return describeType(clazz).variable.(clazz[#name.toString()] == value).length() != 0
}
public function set type(value:String):void
{
if (valueInClass(ObjectType, value)) {
this._type = value;
} else {
//error
}
}
I suppose the second code example you presented doesn't work...
I think it is because you're using the for in loop a little bit wrong.
for (var blah:String in somewhere){
// blah represents a KEY of the somewhere object
// to get the value of this key, use:
var theValue = somewhere[blah];
}
It's the for each loop that loops through the values. But for now I'll use the for in.
Also, it's not in ObjectType, but rather in the class' prototype, that is in ObjectType.prototype.
So, to fix this:
for (var o:* in ObjectType.prototype) {
if (value == ObjectType.prototype[o])
this._type = value;
} else {
//error
}
}
You can solve this using reflection.
A similar question was asked just a few days ago, you should be able to use the same solution, found here.
It should be noted that while the the accepted answer is right, it's also really slow. Not something that you want to do a lot. There are three simpler solutions.
One: Check the value itself:
public function set type(value:String):void
{
if( value != ObjectType.ONE && value != ObjectType.TWO && value != ObjectType.THREE )
return;
}
Obviously, the more constants you have the check the harder this becomes.
Two: Use ints as your constants
Change your ObjectType class to use ints:
public class ObjectType
{
public static var NONE:int = 0;
public static var ONE:int = 1;
public static var TWO:int = 2;
public static var THREE:int = 3;
public static var TOTAL:int = 4;
}
Notice the NONE and TOTAL in there? This makes it easy to check if your value is in the right range:
public function set type(value:int):void
{
if( value <= ObjectType.NONE || value >= ObjectType.TOTAL )
return;
}
You can add more values as needed and you just need to update TOTAL and it'll still work. This needs each value to be in order though.
Three: Use Enums
While Flash has no in-build class for enums, there's a lot of solutions available. Check our the Enum class from Scott Bilas: http://scottbilas.com/blog/ultimate-as3-fake-enums/
Using this as your base class your ObjectType class becomes:
public final class ObjectType extends Enum
{
{ initEnum( ObjectType ); } // static ctor
public static const ONE:ObjectType = new ObjectType;
public static const TWO:ObjectType = new ObjectType;
public static const THREE:ObjectType = new ObjectType;
}
And your check now becomes:
public function set type(value:ObjectType):void
{
...
}
Here, your setter now becomes type safe and will throw errors if anything other than an ObjectType is used.
It turns out that if using an ENUM type of check you should check for the constants property, not variables as showin in the example here:
ActionScript - Determine If Value is Class Constant
I'm attempting to perform dynamic sorting of data that I'm putting into grids into our MVC UI. Since MVC is abstracted from everything else via WCF, I've created a couple utility classes and extensions to help with this. The two most important things (slightly simplified) are as follows:
public static IQueryable<TModel> ApplySortOptions<TModel, TProperty>(this IQueryable<TModel> collection, IEnumerable<ISortOption<TModel, TProperty>> sortOptions) where TModel : class
{
var sortedSortOptions = (from o in sortOptions
orderby o.Priority ascending
select o).ToList();
var results = collection;
foreach (var option in sortedSortOptions)
{
var currentOption = option;
var propertyName = currentOption.Property.MemberWithoutInstance();
var isAscending = currentOption.IsAscending;
if (isAscending)
{
results = from r in results
orderby propertyName ascending
select r;
}
else
{
results = from r in results
orderby propertyName descending
select r;
}
}
return results;
}
public interface ISortOption<TModel, TProperty> where TModel : class
{
Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> Property { get; set; }
bool IsAscending { get; set; }
int Priority { get; set; }
}
I've not given you the implementation for MemberWithoutInstance() but just trust me in that it returns the name of the property as a string. :-)
Following is an example of how I would consume this (using a non-interesting, basic implementation of ISortOption<TModel, TProperty>):
var query = from b in CurrentContext.Businesses
select b;
var sortOptions = new List<ISortOption<Business, object>>
{
new SortOption<Business, object>
{
Property = (x => x.Name),
IsAscending = true,
Priority = 0
}
};
var results = query.ApplySortOptions(sortOptions);
As I discovered with this question, the problem is specific to my orderby propertyName ascending and orderby propertyName descending lines (everything else works great as far as I can tell). How can I do this in a dynamic/generic way that works properly?
You should really look at using Dynamic LINQ for this. In fact, you may opt to simply list the properties by name instead of using an expression, making it somewhat easier to construct.
public static IQueryable<T> ApplySortOptions<T, TModel, TProperty>(this IQueryable<T> collection, IEnumerable<ISortOption<TModel, TProperty>> sortOptions) where TModel : class
{
var results = collection;
foreach (var option in sortOptions.OrderBy( o => o.Priority ))
{
var currentOption = option;
var propertyName = currentOption.Property.MemberWithoutInstance();
var isAscending = currentOption.IsAscending;
results = results.OrderBy( string.Format( "{0}{1}", propertyName, !isAscending ? " desc" : null ) );
}
return results;
}
While I think #tvanfosson's solution will function perfectly, I'm also looking into this possibility:
/// <summary>
/// This extension method is used to help us apply ISortOptions to an IQueryable.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="collection">This is the IQueryable you wish to apply the ISortOptions to.</param>
/// <param name="sortOptions">These are the ISortOptions you wish to have applied. You must specify at least one ISortOption (otherwise, don't call this method).</param>
/// <returns>This returns an IQueryable object.</returns>
/// <remarks>This extension method should honor deferred execution on the IQueryable that is passed in.</remarks>
public static IOrderedQueryable<TModel> ApplySortOptions<TModel, TProperty>(this IQueryable<TModel> collection, IEnumerable<ISortOption<TModel, TProperty>> sortOptions) where TModel : class
{
Debug.Assert(sortOptions != null, "ApplySortOptions cannot accept a null sortOptions input.");
Debug.Assert(sortOptions.Count() > 0, "At least one sort order must be specified to ApplySortOptions' sortOptions input.");
var firstSortOption = sortOptions.OrderBy(o => o.Priority).First();
var propertyName = firstSortOption.Property.MemberWithoutInstance();
var isAscending = firstSortOption.IsAscending;
// Perform the first sort action
var results = isAscending ? collection.OrderBy(propertyName) : collection.OrderByDescending(propertyName);
// Loop through all of the rest ISortOptions
foreach (var sortOption in sortOptions.OrderBy(o => o.Priority).Skip(1))
{
// Make a copy of this or our deferred execution will bite us later.
var currentOption = sortOption;
propertyName = currentOption.Property.MemberWithoutInstance();
isAscending = currentOption.IsAscending;
// Perform the additional orderings.
results = isAscending ? results.ThenBy(propertyName) : results.ThenByDescending(propertyName);
}
return results;
}
using the code from this question's answer:
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> OrderBy<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, string property)
{
return ApplyOrder(source, property, "OrderBy");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> OrderByDescending<T>(this IQueryable<T> source, string property)
{
return ApplyOrder(source, property, "OrderByDescending");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> ThenBy<T>(this IOrderedQueryable<T> source, string property)
{
return ApplyOrder(source, property, "ThenBy");
}
public static IOrderedQueryable<T> ThenByDescending<T>(this IOrderedQueryable<T> source, string property)
{
return ApplyOrder(source, property, "ThenByDescending");
}
private static IOrderedQueryable<T> ApplyOrder<T>(IQueryable<T> source, string property, string methodName)
{
var props = property.Split('.');
var type = typeof (T);
var arg = Expression.Parameter(type, "x");
Expression expr = arg;
foreach (var prop in props)
{
// use reflection (not ComponentModel) to mirror LINQ
var pi = type.GetProperty(prop);
expr = Expression.Property(expr, pi);
type = pi.PropertyType;
}
var delegateType = typeof (Func<,>).MakeGenericType(typeof (T), type);
var lambda = Expression.Lambda(delegateType, expr, arg);
var result = typeof (Queryable).GetMethods().Single(
method => method.Name == methodName
&& method.IsGenericMethodDefinition
&& method.GetGenericArguments().Length == 2
&& method.GetParameters().Length == 2)
.MakeGenericMethod(typeof (T), type)
.Invoke(null, new object[] {source, lambda});
return (IOrderedQueryable<T>) result;
}