I prepared a simple dojo here: http://dojo.telerik.com/iQERE
Scenario:
I have an array within another array and I wanted to render it with a kendo template in a sort of table/grid.
First array's items are the rows and inner array's items are the columns.
I googled and found this technique: template inside template
The problems are:
1) How can I bind values for the nested array's items?
I tried data-bind="value:subval" but it doesn't work.
I think because using that technique the 'real data' of this template is the outer array, not the inner one!
Tried data-bind="value: item.subval" - leaded to nothing.
So finally I tried data-bind="value: subList[#:index#].subval" and it works. But I ask myself: Is this correct?
2) How can I bind the value to a function in the nested template? (famous kendo mvvm calculated fields).
I hoped I could bind all the input to a unique function who takes the 'caller' value and do something (multiply for another model field for example).
But I can't get rid who called the function... my "e" argument is the whole data!!
After some experiments I tried this way: http://dojo.telerik.com/OpOja and first time works... but it seems the function doesn't trigger when the value1 of the model change (wich I would expect in a normal mvvm behavior), maybe because I declared the function inside the dataSource. (it's not an observable object itself?)
I hope I explained well my problem!
Well.. It seems is not possible. Response from a Telerik ticket:
I am afraid, that the Kendo MVVM framework would not allow you to achieve the desired two-way binding for in the discussed scenario. The reason for that is the fact, that in the $.each() in the template would be executed only once and will not be reevaluated in the viewModel changes.
In addition, in case you need to configure a hierarchical DataSource for an MVVM model, I would suggest you to follow this example. You will notice, that similarly to your implementation, it includes a field which is calculated as a function from another field. It however, will not allow you the desired two-way binding too. So the update of the value1 field would not trigger again the above mentioned function.
Related
I'm building a class (sorry - Agent) that will work with a set of Tank objects (Fluid Library) - doing things like monitoring individual levels or total level of all tanks, reporting on levels and initiating actions based on levels - things of that nature. For argument's sake let's call it a "TankMonitor" agent.
Ideally I'd like to be able to define a Parameter in my "TankMonitor" agent that allows me to define the tanks of interest when I place a TankMonitor in main. I have tried to define the type of the parameter as Other - ArrayList<Tank> however I don't know how to set up the next step to allow me to populate the ArrayList of Tanks when I put an instance of this agent in main. My preference would be to have a list type control to populate the ArrayList - much like the way the AnyLogic Seize block allows you to specify multiple resource pools to choose from.
Has anyone attempted this before and been successful?
This is possible as follows:
Change the type to "Other" and then 'Tank[]' , i.e. an Array of Tanks
Change the control type to "one-dimensional array"
Example below. Now you have the same UI to pre-define tanks at design time for your agent instance.
In addition to Benjamin's perfect answer, I'd just add the manual workaround, which is not needed here but can be useful when the parameter in question has a more complicated structure than covered by the pre-made controls, say a list of lists, a map, or similar.
In such a case, the Control Type is still Text, and populating it in an instance happens by pointing it to a new object of the parameter's type. E.g. for an ArrayList<Tank> parameter, you might instantiate a new ArrayList object, which you fill with a list of objects like so:
new ArrayList<Tank>(Arrays.asList(tankA, tankB))
In the Java code, whatever is written into that text box will end up on the right side of a parameter assignment statement in the embedded Agent instance's auto-generated parameter setup function. Therefore, multi-statement code won't work in this spot. Instead, if the process of building the parameter value doesn't fit neatly into a single expression, you can hide the code in a function which returns the desired object, and call that from the parameter's text box.
I want to create a .png file of a HTML page in angularjs and download it. For this I'm currently using dom-to-image.js and using the domToImage.toBlob function and passing the node element to it. But internally when it goes to dom-to-image.js it throws the error:
node.cloneNode() is not a function
Can anyone please assist me here?
Thanks
This error arises when you attempt to call cloneNode() on anything other than a single DOM node.
In this case, the error is coming from the dom-to-image library, which calls that method internally.
Note that without a code snippet, its hard to identify the precise issue with your code, but the point is, when you call domtoimage.toBlob(), you need to supply a single DOM node.
So double check what you are calling it with. If you are selecting by class, for instance, you could end up with more than one element.
Its best practice to be precise with which node you want to convert to a blob - use the id attribute, like this:
domtoimage.toBlob(document.getElementById('element')).then(...)
where element is the id of your target node.
Its also possible you're selecting with angular.element() or even using jQuery directly.
In both cases, this returns an Object -- which you can't call cloneNode() on.
Also note the following from the Angular docs for angular.element():
Note: All element references in AngularJS are always wrapped with jQuery or jqLite (such as the element argument in a directive's compile / link function). They are never raw DOM references.
Which means you would observe the same behavior in both cases, e.g. both of these:
domtoimage.toBlob($('#element')).then(...)
domtoimage.toBlob(angular.element('#element')).then(...)
would result in the error you see. You can index the Object before supplying it to domtoimage.toBlob(), perhaps like this:
domtoimage.toBlob($('#element')[0]).then(...)
domtoimage.toBlob(angular.element('#element')[0]).then(...)
and that would also work.
Also check out this post about "cloneNode is not a function".
In the 1.5.2.3 Defining a Binding Path section of OpenUI5 demokit:
A context exists either for each entry of the aggregation in case of aggregation binding or can be set explicitly for a control by using the setBindingContext method.
In the 1.5.3.3 Element Binding section of OpenUI5 demokit:
Element binding allows to bind elements to a specific object in the model data, which will create a binding context and allow relative binding within the control and all of its children.
It seems to me that the two techniques actually do the same thing. They both create a binding context for a control so that bindings of the containing controls will resolve relatively to it. But what's the difference between them? In what scenario will either of them come into play?
The setBindingContext doesn't work in the following code:https://jsbin.com/bigope/edit?html,output
However, if I change oPanel.setBindingContext("/nameinfo"); to oPanel.bindElement("/nameinfo");, it works, why?
setBindingContext requires you to pass a Context like this:
oPanel.setBindingContext(new sap.ui.model.Context(oModel, "/nameinfo"));
The difference between those two is conceptual.
The Binding Context is used as a parent context for all bindings (for that model) in that Control or its children. It only holds a reference to the used model, (a part of) the path and optional another parent context. It is used when creating relative bindings.
The bindElement method on the other hand behaves like every other bind* method.
It creates a binding (in this case, a ContextBinding) which allows change events, data binding, etc.
Additionally the created ContextBinding also serves as a BindingContext for other bindings, just like a Context added with setBindingContext would do.
Not confusing at all, right ;)?
Reading the code for ManagedObject might help you to understand the internals better. (bindObject = bindElement)
What would be the best approach to implement a form with a variable number of text fields? I'm thinking something like this:
textField1 (removeButton)
textField2 (removeButton)
textField3 (removeButton)
addNewTextFieldButton
I would like this to bind to a list of strings.
I achieved this with an editable grid with a single column and buttons to add/delete rows.
This component is very well integrated with GWT Editor framework so you can bind your grid to a list of objects using a ListStoreEditor
The best approach would be to use the GWT Editor framework. GXT's fields are very well integrated with the Editor framework.
Here is a very rough example of how you might approach this problem.
You would start by creating one Editor for the thing you are wanting to bind to. In your case, I think a composite which contains a TextField (which is bound to the string) and a button. The button won't actually bind to anything, but you will provide a way for something which uses this class to register a SelectHandler against it. Let's call this editor SubEditor.
Once you create a UI component which is designed to bind to one string, you will next create a ListEditor<String, SubEditor> which will bind to a List<String> which will compose a view, consisting of one SubEditor per each String in the bound list.
You don't really need to create the SubEditor, as you could construct something as simple as what you want within your ListEditor's EditorSource class (read through the tutorials on ListEditors).
Again, I want to emphasize the this is a ROUGH example on how to get started. I hope there is enough information here for you to fill in the pieces.
The following SO question has helped me out a lot:
Using GWT Editors with a complex usecase
I have a custom node type for which I want to have a field that uses a special combobox based on list_text. When one chooses the type list_text it is normally possible to enter a static list of selectable texts, however, I want this list to be dynamic, i.e. based on the results of a db_query. What is the best way to do this using Drupal 7?
A simple example for clarification: A node of this custom type X contains a field that points to another node, so whenever a node of type X is created I want a combobox that contains all other nodes.
(Best solution would be to only display the combobox during node creation, and no longer during edit. But I could also live with it if the combobox was shown during the edit as well.)
I have tried to customize options_select by defining my own data type and implementing hook_options_list accordingly. The combobox was displayed during creation with the correct values, however, I could not save it.. I have no idea what went wrong there, but on the first submit it would change to a different theme, and when I tried again I got an internal server error. Am I on the right track at all with defining a completely new data type for the field? there surely must be a simpler way?
You're right in that you don't need a new datatype. Here's a good tutorial on how to do this. It's not specifically for D7 but I didn't see much that wasn't still applicable. There may be a better way to do it in D7 specifically but I would love to know it too if so :)
The tutorial linked by allegroconmolto sent me on the right way. Thanks for that.
Here's the simpler way of doing it: tutorial
Basically, it is, as I assumed, a common problem and hence a simple solution for it was included in the webform module by now. It provides a hook_webform_select_options_info which can be used to register a callback method. The callback method is then called each time a corresponding option select of a webform is shown, so that you can easily fill it with the results of a dbquery or anything else. Works like a charm and takes next to no time to implement.