I have a code where I call a method e.g. MyMock.Create(true). I want to replace every call with true to false, when I am testing it in PlayMode. How to do that? I spend hours and I am just starting with NSubstitute so probably it is something quite easy...
Inside visual studio (crtrl + f) find & replace MyMock.Create(true) with MyMock.Create(false) for the whole project. Alternatively you could switch true with false inside the Create method like this
bool tmp = true;
if (param==true)
tmp = false
else
tmp = true
.....
Use tmp instead of the given parameter of the Method MyMock.Create
Related
There is a variable called f, And this code is supposed to play random audio whenever it's clicked
local clickDetector = script.Parent.ClickDetector
f = math.random(1,3)
function onMouseClick()
script.Parent.f.TimePosition = 0
script.Parent.f.Playing = true
end
clickDetector.MouseClick:connect(onMouseClick)
How do I make it so it will thing it's not inside
assuming the parent exist, try
script.Parent[f]
I want to create a netlogo primitive that may receive a boolean or may not. Therefore I want make possible to the user that he uses the primitive of these two ways:
1:
ask Walkers [
qlearningextension:learning
]
2:
ask Walkers [
qlearningextension:learning true
]
I tried to do that with OptionalType, but I could not make it. Is it possible to do what I want? If so, how can I do it?
So OptionalType unfortunately only works with CommandBlockType. For a good example of how that works, check out the sample-scala extension (maybe that's where you saw a reference to it in the first pace). OptionalType will not work with BooleanType.
There is a secondary option, that's a little hacky. You can use RepeatableType along with setting defaultOption and minimumOption in your syntax (so NetLogo knows that 0 arguments is okay/expected). Scala code example:
object RepeatableTypeTest extends api.Command {
override def getSyntax =
commandSyntax(
right = List(BooleanType | RepeatableType),
defaultOption = Some(0),
minimumOption = Some(0)
)
def perform(args: Array[api.Argument], context: api.Context) {
println(args.length)
if (args.length > 0) {
val ref = args(0).getBoolean
println(ref)
} else {
println("No argument given!")
}
}
}
Then you just have to wrap calls with the boolean argument in parenthesis, so NetLogo knows you're not starting a new command (it expects the defaultOption without the parens):
to test
sample-scala:rep-bool
(sample-scala:rep-bool true)
(sample-scala:rep-bool false)
(sample-scala:rep-bool false true false true false)
end
The problem with this, as you can see in the example, is if your users want to they can provide extra useless booleans: (sample-scala:rep-bool false true false false true false false). If your code ignores them they won't have an effect, but they could be confusing or weird to extension users.
I would like to submit my lane with optional options. So for example the lane:
lane :mylane do |options|
mailgun(
to: "#{options[:mailto]}"
....
)
end
How do I give :mailto a default value? So if I would run fastlane mylane it would automatically set :mailto to mail#example.com.
But if I would runfastlane mylane mailto:"secondmail#example.com" it would use that value
As Lyndsey Ferguson pointed out in a comment on this answer, the following is simplest:
mail_addr = options.fetch(:mailto, 'mail#example.com')
where the first parameter of fetch is the option to fetch, and the second is the default value if the option was not passed in.
I just want to add that this works a lot better than the other suggestion:
options[:mailto] || 'mail#example.com'
when dealing with boolean options.
Fastlane (or maybe Ruby) interprets true, false, yes, and no as boolean values instead of strings (maybe others too, though I tried N, n, NO, and FALSE and they were treated as strings), so if in your lane implementation you had:
options[:my_option] || true
or
(options[:my_option] || 'true') == 'true'
you would get unexpected behaviour.
If you didn't pass in myOption at all, this would default to true as you would expect. If you passed in true this would also return true. But if you passed in false this would turn into true, which you of course wouldn't want.
Using options.fetch(:myOption, true) works great with boolean flags like the ones mentioned above and therefore seems better to use in general.
Here's a very thorough example in case you want to test it yourself:
lane :my_lane do |options|
puts("You passed in #{options[:my_option]}")
my_option = options[:my_option] || true
if my_option
puts('Using options[:my_option], the result is true')
else
puts('Using options[:my_option] the result is false')
end
my_option_fetched = options.fetch(:my_option, true)
if my_option_fetched
puts('Using fetched, the result is true')
else
puts('Using fetched, the result is false')
end
end
Outputs:
fastlane my_lane my_option:true
You passed in true
Using options[:my_option], the result is true
Using fetched, the result is true
fastlane my_lane my_option:false
You passed in false
Using options[:my_option], the result is true
Using fetched, the result is false
fastlane my_lane my_option:no
You passed in false
Using options[:my_option], the result is true
Using fetched, the result is false
Note, e.g. FALSE would default to true as it is not being interpreted as a boolean, which seems reasonable to me.
(Fastlane 1.77.0, Ruby 2.7.2)
EDIT: It's worth noting that if you pass an empty string instead of nothing/null you would not get the default value from the fetch method.
I'm not sure there's a way to make Fastlane pass a default. The processing is pretty simple:
https://github.com/fastlane/fastlane/blob/master/fastlane/lib/fastlane/command_line_handler.rb#L10
But you can easily do this in your Fastfile:
lane :mylane do |options|
mail_addr = options[:mailto] || "mail#example.com"
mailgun(
to: "#{mail_addr}"
....
)
end
I've got this odd problem.
If I make a call on that function through amfphp service browser and give it a valid ID and leave the $num_images field blank amfphp will actually pass a blank string as the argument.
// if i call this function width just an ID
function getWorkers($id, $num_images = 100) {
...
// num_images will be set as ''
}
I can easily override using a check:
function getWorkers($id, $num_images = 100) {
if($num_images=='') $num_images = 100;
...
// num_images will now be really set as 100
}
Anyone experiencing the same with amfphp?
That's odd, I never got that from AMFPHP. If you don't have the latest version try updating your installation of AMFPHP. Also make sure Flash doesn't somehow pass an empty variable as the second variable.
(Copied from the comment.)
I am having a strange problem with boolean logic. I must be doing something daft, but I can't figure it out.
In the below code firstMeasure.isInvisibleArea is true and measureBuffer1 is nil.
Even though test1 is evaluating to NO for some reason it is still dropping into my if statement.
It works ok if I use the commented out line.
Any idea why this happens?
BOOL firstVisible = firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea;
BOOL notFirstVisible = !(firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea);
BOOL measureBufferNil = measureBuffer1 == nil;
BOOL test1 = measureBuffer1 == nil && !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea;
BOOL test2 = measureBufferNil && !firstVisible;
if (measureBuffer1 == nil && !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea)
//if (measureBufferNil && !firstVisible)
{
//do some action
}
Update 1:
I isolated the problem to !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea as I've entirely taken on the measureBuffer bit.
Inside isInVisible area is a small calculation (it doesn't modify anything though), but the calculation is using self.view.frame. I am going take this out of the equation as well and see what happens. My hunch is that self.view.frame is changing between the two calls to isInVisibleArea.
Update 2:
This is indeed the problem. I have added the answer in more detail below
When in doubt, you should fully parenthesize. Without looking up the precedence rules, what I think what is happening is that = is getting higher precedence than == or &&. So try:
BOOL test1 = ((measureBuffer1 == nil) && !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea);
While you certainly can parenthesize, you should also know that nil objects evaluate to boolean NO and non-nil objects evaluate to boolean YES. So you could just as easily write this:
BOOL firstVisible = firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea;
BOOL notFirstVisible = !(firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea);
BOOL measureBufferNil = measureBuffer1;
BOOL test1 = !measureBuffer1 && !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea;
BOOL test2 = measureBufferNil && !firstVisible;
if (measureBuffer1 && !firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea) {
//do some action
}
You would end up with the same results. I agree with GoatRider, though. It's always far better to parenthesize your conditional expressions to clarify what you really want to happen than it is to rely on the language's operator precedence to do it for you.
If test1 is evaluating to NO as you say, then drop test1 into the if statement:
if(test1){
//see if this executes?
}
See what that does.
My hunch was correct, it is related to the view frame changing between calls to firstMeasure.isInVisible area.
This whole routine is called in response to the view moving. I think I need to grab the value of firstMeasure.isInVisibleArea at the start of the method and use that value throughout.
Phew. Boolean logic isn't broken. All is right with the world.
Thanks for all your input