While perusing an application that I'm documenting, I've run across some examples of bang notation in accessing object properties/methods, etc. and in other places they use dot notation for what seems like the same purpose.
Is there a difference or preference to using one or the other? Some simple googling only reveals limited information on the subject with some people actually using it in opposite cases. Perhaps there is a coding standards section from MS somewhere that indicates the method of madness?
Despite the (formerly) accepted answer to this question, the bang is not in fact a member or collection access operator. It does one simple and specific thing: The bang operator provides late-bound access to the default member of an object, by passing the literal name following the bang operator as a string argument to that default member.
That's it. The object doesn't have to be a collection. It doesn't have to have a method or property called Item. All it needs is a Property Get or Function which can accept a string as the first argument.
For much more detail and proof, see my blog post discussing this: The Bang! (Exclamation Operator) in VBA
The bang operator (!) is shorthand for accessing members of a Collection or other enumerable object, such as the Fields property of an ADODB.Recordset.
For example, you can create a Collection and add a few keyed items to it:
Dim coll As Collection
Set coll = New Collection
coll.Add "First Item", "Item1"
coll.Add "Second Item", "Item2"
coll.Add "Third Item", "Item3"
You can access an item in this collection by its key in three ways:
coll.Item("Item2")
This is the most explicit form.
coll("Item2")
This works because Item is the default method of the Collection class, so you can omit it.
coll!Item2
This is short-hand for both of the above forms. At run-time, VB6 takes the text after the bang and passes it as a parameter to the Item method.
People seem to make this more complicated than it should be, which is why it's hard to find a straightforward explanation. Usually the complications or "reasons not to use the bang operator" stem from a misunderstanding of how simple it actually is. When someone has a problem with the bang operator, they tend to blame it instead of the real cause of the problem they are having, which is often more subtle.
For example, some people recommend not using the bang operator to access controls on a form. Thus, Me.txtPhone is preferred over Me!txtPhone. The "reason" this is seen as bad is that Me.txtPhone will be checked at compile-time for correctness, but Me!txtPhone won't.
In the first case, if you mistype the code as Me.txtFone and there is no control with that name, your code won't compile. In the second case, if you wrote Me!txtFone, you won't get a compile error. Instead, your code will blow up with a run-time error if it reaches the line of code that used Me!txtFone.
The problem with the argument against the bang operator is that this problem has nothing to do with the bang operator itself. It's behaving exactly the way it's supposed to.
When you add a control to a form, VB automatically adds a property to your form with the same name as the control you added. This property is part of the form's class, so the compiler can check for typos at compile-time if you access controls using the dot (".") operator (and you can access them using the dot operator precisely because VB created a named control property for you).
Since Me!ControlName is actually short-hand for Me.Controls("ControlName")1, it should not be suprising that you don't get any compile-time checks against mistyping the control name.
Put another way, if the bang operator is "bad" and the dot operator is "good", then you might think
Me.Controls("ControlName")
is better than
Me!ControlName
because the first version uses a dot, but in this case, the dot isn't any better at all, since you are still accessing the control name via a parameter. It's only "better" when there is an alternative way to write the code such that you will get compile-time checking. This happens to be the case with controls due to VB creating properties for each control for you, and this is why Me.ControlName is sometimes recommended over Me!ControlName.
I had originally stated that the Controls property was the default property of the Form class, but David pointed out in the comments that Controls isn't the default property of Form. The actual default property returns a collection that includes the contents of Me.Controls, which is why the bang short-hand still works.
Couple gotchas to serve as addenda to the two exceptional answers already posted:
Accessing recordset fields in forms vs. reports
The default item of Form objects in Access is a union of the form's Controls collection and the form recordset's Fields collection. If the name of a control conflicts with the name of a field, I'm not sure which object is actually returned. Since the default property of both a field and a control is their .Value, it's often a "distinction without a difference." In other words, one normally doesn't care which it is because the values of the field and control are often the same.
Beware of naming conflicts!
This situation is exacerbated by Access's Form and Report designer defaulting to naming bound controls the same as the recordset field to which they are bound. I've personally adopted the convention of renaming controls with their control type prefix (e.g., tbLastName for the text box bound to the LastName field).
Report recordset fields aren't there!
I said earlier the Form object's default item is a collection of Controls and Fields. However, the Report object's default item is only its collection of Controls. So if one wants to refer to a recordset field using the bang operator, one needs to include that field as the source for a (hidden, if desired) bound control.
Beware conflicts with explicit form/report properties
When one adds controls to a form or report, Access automatically creates properties that refer to these controls. For example, a control named tbLastName would be available from a form's code module by referring to Me.tbLastName. However, Access will not create such a property if it conflicts with an existing form or report property. For example, assume one adds a control named Pages. Referring to Me.Pages in the form's code module will return the form's Pages property, not the control named "Pages".
In this example, one could access the "Pages" control explicitly using Me.Controls("Pages") or implicitly using the bang operator, Me!Pages. Be aware, though, that using the bang operator means that Access might instead return a field named "Pages" if one exists in the form's recordset.
What about .Value?
Though not explicitly mentioned in the question, this topic came up in the above comments. The default property for Field objects and most "data-bindable"¹ Control objects is .Value. Since this is the default property, VBA will implicitly return the .Value property's value when it does not make sense to return the object itself. Thus, it's common practice to do this...
Dim EmployeeLastName As String
EmployeeLastName = Me.tbLastName
...instead of this...
EmployeeLastName = Me.tbLastName.Value
The above two statements produce identical results because EmployeeLastName is a string.
Beware the subtle .Value bug when keying dictionaries
There are some cases where this convention can cause subtle bugs. The most notable--and, if memory serves, only--one I've actually run into in practice is when using the value of a Field/Control as a Dictionary key.
Set EmployeePhoneNums = CreateObject("Scripting.Dictionary")
Me.tbLastName.Value = "Jones"
EmployeePhoneNums.Add Key:=Me.tbLastName, Item:="555-1234"
Me.tbLastName.Value = "Smith"
EmployeePhoneNums.Add Key:=Me.tbLastName, Item:="555-6789"
One would likely expect that the above code creates two entries in the EmployeePhoneNums dictionary. Instead, it throws an error on the last line because we are trying to add a duplicate key. That is, the tbLastName Control object itself is the key, not the value of the control. In this context, the control's value does not even matter.
In fact, I expect that the object's memory address (ObjPtr(Me.tbLastName)) is likely what's being used behind the scenes to index the dictionary. I did a quick test that seems to bear this out.
'Standard module:
Public testDict As New Scripting.Dictionary
Sub QuickTest()
Dim key As Variant
For Each key In testDict.Keys
Debug.Print ObjPtr(key), testDict.Item(key)
Next key
End Sub
'Form module:
Private Sub Form_Current()
testDict(Me.tbLastName) = Me.tbLastName.Value
Debug.Print ObjPtr(Me.tbLastName); "..."; Me.tbLastName
End Sub
When running the above code, exactly one dictionary item is added each time the form is closed and re-opened. Moving from record to record (and thus causing multiple calls to the Form_Current routine) does not add new dictionary items, because it is the Control object itself indexing the dictionary, and not the Control's value.
My personal recommendations/coding conventions
Over the years, I've adopted the following practices, YMMV:
Prefix Form/Report control names with control type indicators (e.g., tbTextBox, lblLabel, etc.)
Refer to Form/Report controls in code using Me. notation (e.g., Me.tbLastName)
Avoid creating table/query fields with problematic names in the first place
Use Me! notation when there are conflicts, such as with legacy applications (e.g., Me!Pages)
Include hidden report controls to gain access to report Recordset field values
Explicitly include .Value only when the situation warrants the added verbosity (e.g., Dictionary keys)
¹ What's a "data-bindable" control?
Basically, a control with a ControlSource property, such as a TextBox or ComboBox. A non-bindable control would be something like a Label or CommandButton. The default property of both a TextBox and ComboBox is .Value; Labels and CommandButtons have no default property.
Related
Example: What is the difference between :
List<UserCompany> findByCompany_IdAndCompany_IsActivated(params)
and
List<UserCompany> findByCompanyIdAndCompanyIsActivated(params)
There is no difference if your model is unambiguous with respect to field names.
List<UserCompany> findByCompanyIdAndCompanyIsActivated(params) -
this first thinks that companyId and companyIsActivated are properties within UserCompany and tries to find them if fails
it then thinks that UserCompany has a field Company - which is another class and Company has field - Id and IsActivated and tries to find them
Where as the below thing
List<UserCompany> findByCompany_IdAndCompany_IsActivated(params)
assumes directly that UserCompany has a field Company - which is another class and Company has field - Id and IsActivated and tries to find them
From the spring documentation
Property expressions :---
Property expressions can refer only to a direct
property of the managed entity, as shown in the preceding example. At
query creation time you already make sure that the parsed property is
a property of the managed domain class. However, you can also define
constraints by traversing nested properties. Assume Persons have
Addresses with ZipCodes. In that case a method name of
List findByAddressZipCode(ZipCode zipCode); creates the
property traversal x.address.zipCode. The resolution algorithm starts
with interpreting the entire part (AddressZipCode) as the property and
checks the domain class for a property with that name (uncapitalized).
If the algorithm succeeds it uses that property. If not, the algorithm
splits up the source at the camel case parts from the right side into
a head and a tail and tries to find the corresponding property, in our
example, AddressZip and Code. If the algorithm finds a property with
that head it takes the tail and continue building the tree down from
there, splitting the tail up in the way just described. If the first
split does not match, the algorithm move the split point to the left
(Address, ZipCode) and continues.
Although this should work for most cases, it is possible for the
algorithm to select the wrong property. Suppose the Person class has
an addressZip property as well. The algorithm would match in the first
split round already and essentially choose the wrong property and
finally fail (as the type of addressZip probably has no code
property). To resolve this ambiguity you can use _ inside your method
name to manually define traversal points. So our method name would end
up like so:
List findByAddress_ZipCode(ZipCode zipCode);
Underscore is reserved character which allows you to point the right object to construct jpa query. It's used only with nested objects. For example if you would like to query by ZipCode inside Address inside you Company object.
More information can be found here
I have three dropdown boxes on a Main_Form. I will add the chosen content into three fields on the form, Form_Applications.
These three lines are added :
Form_Applications.Classification = Form_Main_Form.Combo43.Value
Form_Applications.Countryname_Cluster = Form_Main_Form.Combo56.Value
Form_Applications.Application = Form_Main_Form.Combo64.Value
The first two work perfectly but the last one gives error code 438!
I can enter in the immediate window :
Form_Applications.Classification = "what ever"
Form_Applications.Countryname_Cluster = "what ever"
but not for the third line. Then, after enter, the Object doesn't support this property or method error appears.
I didn't expect this error as I do exactly the same as in the first two lines.
Can you please help or do you need more info ?
In VBA Application is a special word and should not be used to address fields.
FormName.Application will return an object that points to the application instance that is running that form as opposed to an object within that form.
From the Application object you can do all sorts of other things such as executing external programs and other application level stuff like saving files/
Rename your Application field to something else, perhaps ApplicationCombo and change your line of code to match the new name. After doing this the code should execute as you expect.
Form_Applications.Application is referring to the application itself. It is not a field, so therefore it is not assignable (at least with a string).
You really haven't provided enough code to draw any real conclusions though. But looking at what you have posted, you definitely need to rethink your approach.
It's to say definitely but you are not doing the same. It looks like you are reading a ComboBox value the same (I will assume Combo64 is the same as 43 and 56) but my guess is that what you are assigning that value to is the problem:
Form_Applications.Application =
Application is not assignable. Is there another field you meant to use there?
Obviously including spaces in table names, field names and control names is a bad idea (since it is used as a separator in practically all the imperative programming languages use commercially today*). You have to surround those controls and fields with [], etc. I'm trying to demonstrate another one of the problems with spaces to someone else.
I seem to recall that there is a situation that can arise where because a field name has a space in it (e.g., "Foo ID") and a control based on it is also called "Foo ID", that you can end accidentally referencing the underlying field instead of the control.
e.g., you update Foo ID from empty to "hello world" and then you need to check the value for null before the record is saved; something like "me.[Foo ID]" returns Null instead of "Hello World"
How can I duplicate this unexpected behaviour?
(* - Lisp, Prolog and and APL aren't imperative programming languages)
Since the control name can't have spaces in it when you reference it in code using the default controls property of the form (ie, Me.Foo_ID), the spaces are replaced with underscores. So in your example, Me.Foo_ID would refer to the control, but Me![Foo ID] would refer to the underlying field. (Even this statement appears incorrect on further consideration: Me![Foo ID] almost certainly refers to the control named "Foo ID".)
As David Fenton rightly points out, the control itself can be named with spaces. And it can be referenced in code with spaces when referenced as follows: Me.Controls("Foo ID") or Me![Foo ID] as those forms can properly handle spaces. But if you want to use the shorthand, you'll need to add the underscore: Me.Foo_ID.
In that case Me.Foo_ID would return "Hello World" before the record is saved (while the form is Dirty), but Me![Foo ID] would return Null.
EDIT: After some testing I have not been able to actually reproduce the odd behavior you are after (using several different combinations).
Thanks to David Fenton for setting me straight (please let me know if I'm still off somewhere).
How can I validate the cells in a DataGridColumn individually? (ActionScript 3.5) The validation is configured per-cell, based on fields in the given row. For example
FIELD VALUE TYPE
age 13 Integer
height 13x3 Integer
registered true Boolean
temperature 98.G6 Float
In this case, of course 13x3 and 98.G6 would be invalid.
It's easy to write a Validator ; and to access the data provider objects.
But how do I get individual access to the GUI cell objects so I can set the errorString on an individual cell, either directly or through a Validator?
The itemRenderer/ TextInput control is re-used across the cells for performance reasons, so accessing the GUI-level objects is tricky.
Edit
Answers:
One way to validate and display the invalidation markings, but not per-cell, is to validate all data-provider objects and then set the errorString on the entire grid.
One way to validate per-cell is on the itemEditEnd event handler. (See these pages A B C D). One disadvantage is that it only allows access to the cells from the "inside", not in an action that validates the grid on command.
A custom itemRenderer is another possibility, as in the answer below, but like 3 above, it only allows access to the cells from the "inside", not in an action that validates the grid on command.
See Richard Haven's answer below.
And here's how to access the GUI objects: The list of relevant GUI objects is a protected field; so you can access it by subclassing, then iterate over the GUI-components which represent the cells and set the errorString on each one.
This website at BigResource asks how to access an individual cell. The third post answers there question and provides a link to a better resource than this. Figured you would want both. Hopefully this helps.
If you are looking for arbitrary validation (e.g. on a button or page navigation) rather than immediate navigation (e.g. on cell exit or end-of-edit), then the data is in the underlying dataProvider. I would do validations there rather than dig around inside the grid.
You can add a flag to the data item so the item renderer displays it as an error (or use an external list to flag it).
Cheers
Are you sure you actually want to access the individual cells' DisplayObjects? The component manages instances so that it only creates as many as it needs to display (so that huge datasets don't require a huge number of DisplayObjects on screen).
I think a better alternative would be to provide your DataGridColumn with a custom itemRenderer. You can write this class to accept a validator and update its appearance, and there are a bunch of great tutorials around about that.
How do you guys avoid keyword conflicts in your language?
For example, I'm creating a class (VB 2008) to hold all the configuration variables for some reports we generate. Naturally, one of the variables is "Date". And of course you can't have anything named the same as a keyword. In VB 2008 you do have the option of surrounding a conflicting word with []'s and fix it but I've always seen that as a hack. Any suggestions? What are your names to get around common keywords?
Code to help visualize...
Dim m_Title As String
Dim m_Date As String
Public Property Title() As String
Get
Return m_Title
End Get
Set(ByVal value As String)
m_Title = value
End Set
End Property
Public Property [Date]() As String
Get
End Get
Set(ByVal value As String)
End Set
End Property
Probably think about more specific nature of the variable?
From your example, the "Date" can be "Created Date" or "Posted Date" or anything else. If you find your variable names too trivial, you may be oversimplifying (or even obfuscating) your code. Help your coworkers by creating a clear but concise variable names.
Don't look at [Date] as a hack; if your property represents a date, it should be called Date. Use the tools you have available to get the job done. Personally I feel that properties that have the names they do only to get around such conflicts are more of a hack, since you will get to deal with it every time you use the property.
misspell your variable names!
On .NET, it is reasonable to consider the Common Language Specification (CLS) as the lowest common denominator that you should cater to. This is documented in ECMA-335 "Common Language
Infrastructure (CLI) Partitions I to VI". Here's what it says specifically about names; a note in CLS Rule #4 (8.5.1 "Valid names"):
CLS (consumer): Need not consume types that violate CLS Rule 4, but shall have a mechanism to allow access to named items that use one of its own keywords as the name.
So no, it's not really a hack, but a definite rule. The reason why it's there is that, as .NET is extensible as far as languages targeting it go, you can never avoid name clashes. If you cover C#, there's VB. If you cover C# and VB, there's C++/CLI. If you cover all those, there's F# and Delphi Prism. And so on. Hence why it is mandated by CLS that languages provide a way to escape their keywords as identifiers; and all languages I've listed provide some way to do so (and thus are compliant CLS consumers).
In general, it is still considered good manners to avoid clashes with either C# or VB non-context keywords, mainly because those two languages are the most popular by a very large margin. For example, it is the reason why it's HashSet and not just Set - the latter is a VB keyword. The full listings are:
C# keywords
VB keywords
Most languages have something to escape any reserved words. C# has # so you can use #class as an argument name (something MVC adopters are learning).
If the domain states that a certain word be used to describe it then that is what the escaping of reserved words is there for. I wouldn't be afraid to escape reserved words to get my model close to the domain even if it means more typing - the clarity is worth it!
To avoid naming conflicts with keywords, I simply don't use keywords.
In your case, Date. Date of what? If I had to maintain your application that would probably be the first thing I'd ask. The great thing about keywords is that they're completely generic, something a variable name should never be.
There is no silver bullet, but modern languages help a lot with better abilities to manage namespaces.
In my case, I curse the fact that C has an 'index' command.
"Date_" or "_Date".
This is one question where Perl dodges the question entirely.
Variables always have one of $%#*&, the only things that can conflict are Globs/Handles, and subroutines.
Even that isn't much of a problem because Globs/Handles aren't used very much any more.
Subroutines and keywords are very much the same in Perl. If you need to get at the built-in subroutine/keyword you can get at it by appending CORE::, for example CORE::dump.
Really I think the only keywords you would have a problem with are sub, my, local, and 'our', because those keywords are parsed very early in parser. Note that you can still create a sub with those names, it just won't work without specifying the full name, or from a blessed reference, or with a symbolic reference.
{
package test;
sub my{ print "'my' called using $_[-1]\n" };
sub new{ bless {}, $_[0] };
sub sub{ print "'sub' called using $_[-1]\n" };
sub symbolic{
*{__PACKAGE__.'::'.$_[1]}{CODE}->('symbolic reference');
}
my $var; # notice this doesn't call test::my()
}
package main;
my $test = test->new;
# Called from a blessed reference
$test->my('blessed reference');
$test->sub('blessed reference');
print "\n";
# Called using the full name
test::my('full name');
test::sub('full name');
print "\n";
# Called using a symbolic reference
$test->symbolic('my');
$test->symbolic('sub');
Output:
'my' called using blessed reference
'sub' called using blessed reference
'my' called using full name
'sub' called using full name
'my' called using symbolic reference
'sub' called using symbolic reference