Totally confused by this example in react-codemirror2 which uses both import and require syntax;
[See https://github.com/scniro/react-codemirror2 in the section requiring codemirror resources]
import CodeMirror from 'react-codemirror2';
require('codemirror/mode/xml/xml');
require('codemirror/mode/javascript/javascript');
I know the require('codemirror/etc') stuff is referring to a plain JS library dependency (not React specific), but why does require even work without throwing an error?
Can the require be replaced by an import?
How to make the warning in VS Code editor go away?
The main idea of this part of the Docs is that you need to require by yourself CodeMirror modules that you needed (it means that if you need a javascript mode or autocomplete, you need to add these modules to your code).
react-codemirror2 doc says that:
How to import/require these assets will vary according to the
specifics of your development environment
In most cases, both require and import will do the same, so you can use the code that is given in react-codemirror2 docs:
import CodeMirror from 'react-codemirror2';
require('codemirror/mode/xml/xml');
require('codemirror/mode/javascript/javascript');
or use its analog with imports:
import CodeMirror from 'react-codemirror2';
import 'codemirror/mode/xml/xml';
import 'codemirror/mode/javascript/javascript';
Related
I have a set of Swift Packages that I'm writing (ex: CUIExpandableButton), that I'd like to roll up into another Swift Package called CrystalUI. The overall goal is to write a set of packages that get bundled into a single package. However, I want to make it so people can just have one import
import CrystalUI
instead of a series of import statements
import CrystalUI
import CUIExpandableButton
import PreviewKit
...
Is it possible to re-expose an existing library as part of the parent library?
Looks like #_exported Is what I was looking for. Found this article that explains it. It's an unsupported method but it's also used in Alamofire so I think it's safe.
I'm having trouble using the Backendless plugin for Flutter.
I include
import 'package:backendless_sdk/backendless_sdk.dart';
(as per the instructions) and can then use e.g. Backendless.UserService. But if I try to generate a user to register, e.g.:
var user = new BackendlessUser();
user.setEmail("info#example.org");
user.setPassword("password");
Backendless.UserService.register(user);
I get an error Undefined class 'BackendlessUser' on the first line. This class is defined in src/modules/user_service.dat, which is exported by src/modules/modules.dartlike this:
library modules;
export 'cache.dart';
...
export 'user_service.dart';
which in turn is imported by backendless_sdk.dart like this:
import 'package:backendless_sdk/src/modules/modules.dart';
I would have thought that it would get imported indirectly by the import of backendless_sdk.dart, but apparently not. When I import it explicitly (with the same import statement, but now in my own code and not just indirectly in backendless_sdk.dart), I get a warning Don't import implementation files from another package. But it's not an implementation file; it's exported as part of the public API (at least that's what I understand the export statement to mean).
The Dart tutorial for creating packages suggests to place the export statements directly under lib, not in lib/src, so I'm wondering whether this is an error in the structure of the plugin, or whether I'm doing something wrong.
I'd be grateful both for a solution to this particular problem and also for pointers to how I can better understand packages, libraries, imports and exports in dart; unfortunately I don't find the language specification particularly helpful in this regard.
(The error and the warning are the same whether I use flutter analyze or IntelliJ IDEA.)
The problem has been fixed in the 0.0.3 version of the plugin. Please update the backendless_sdk version in your pubspec.yaml.
You can include the only one import now:
import 'package:backendless_sdk/backendless_sdk.dart';
Please also note, that there are some changes in the syntax. So for your example you should use:
var user = new BackendlessUser()
..email = "info#example.org"
..password = "password";
Backendless.userService.register(user);
Thanks for using Flutter SDK and pointing out this issue.
It's indeed the problem in the structure of the plugin. The Backendless team is aware of it and this problem will be fixed in the next release of the plugin.
For now you can import explicitly and suppress the warning.
I can't import a file in Pycharm.
I use this code:
import useful_tools
This is the error:
Unused import statement, this inspection detects names that should resolve but don't. Due to dynamic dispatch and duck typing, this is possible in a limited but useful number of cases. Top level and class level items are supported better than instance items
The warning means you did not uses useful_tools in the code after the import. It will work in runtime, but it's useless if PyCharm is not mistaken of course. Please provide the whole script code, as it's hard to tell more.
I'm about to try implementing some IoC/DI framework in our application (thinking of Inversify, if there are any other recommendations) but we still have the problem of having to include the files for their Types. How do we get around this? We're using the latest version of TypeScript (2.3 as of writing this).
We have a lot of imports for various types, for example:
// Components
import {GuideTime} from '../components/guide-time/guide-time.component';
import {GuideNetwork} from '../components/guide-network/guide-network.component';
import {GuideDetail} from '../components/guide-detail/guide-detail.component';
import {Player} from '../components/player/player.component';
// Services
import {Keys, KeyService} from '../core/services/key.service';
import {GuideService} from '../core/services/guide/guide.service';
import {afterCSSUpdate} from '../core/services/utility.service';
import {DataService} from '../core/services/data/data.service';
Or just to get the type of something:
import {ITitle} from '../../models/title.interface';
import {IGuide} from '../../models/guide.interface';
Is there a way to consolidate these (preferably automatically, or globally)? I realize I can probably make a mytypes.ts file somewhere and then just import and export all the types from our application so there's a single, central file to import, but that introduces other problems (and a lot of work).
Thanks!
To make all of these global you would need to import them all to a single interface, and then import that interface wherever you need access to every type. Something similar to
import * as mainInterface from 'MainInterface'
Additionally, you could try importing for side effects only (which would give you access to the types), although this is not recommended in practice.
From the documentation:
Though not recommended practice, some modules set up some global state that can be used by other modules. These modules may not have any exports, or the consumer is not interested in any of their exports. To import these modules, use: import "./my-module.js";
EDIT Additionally, similar to the above single interface solution, you can put each of the types into the same namespace. You can spread a namespace across multiple files using this approach, which means you can just wrap each type in a main namespace.
namespace MainNamespace {
export class GuideTime {
...
}
...
}
I want to import the entire weka.classifiers.functions package but dont want to import RBFNetwork class.
(ns com.wekatest
(:import (weka.classifiers Classifier Evaluation)
(weka.classifiers.functions)
(weka.core Attribute FastVector Instance Instances)))
Edit: (weka.classifiers.functions) doesn't import the entire package. How do I do that?
Clojure does not provide a way to import every class in a Java package without specifying each class explicitly. See here for Rich Hickey's response to essentially the same question: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/browse_thread/thread/fa00a0ff4c264f9a
This does not preclude you from writing code that would add this functionality, but Rich also mentions why this could be difficult (Java packages are not enumerable, so you would have to walk the classpath to know what classes are inside each package).