The below code is working, but its looking odd to me, is there any better way to this.
var res:scala.collection.mutable.LinkedHashMap[String,scala.collection.immutable.Map[String,String]]=??
var arList = new ArrayList[String]()
res.keySet.map(arList.add(_))
//here res key set changed so i want to reassign the list by new keySet
res=?? //updated
arList.clear
res.keySet.map(arList.add(_))
its looking very odd that to call the .clear on arList
You can use default JavaConverters.
import scala.collection.JavaConverters._
val list = new java.util.ArrayList(res.keySet.asJavaCollection)
I didn't get why do you need to do clear, is it some requirement that you pass ArrayList once and update it's content later?
Related
How do I implement the following method in Scala.js?
import scala.scalajs.js
def toScalaArray(input: js.typedarray.Uint8Array): Array[Byte] =
// code in question
edited per request: tl;dr
input.view.map(_.toByte).toArray
Original answer
I'm not intimately familiar with Scala-js, but I can elaborate on some of the questions that came up in the comments, and improve upon your self-answer.
Also I don't quite get why I need toByte calls
class Uint8Array extends Object with TypedArray[Short, Uint8Array]
Scala treats a Uint8Array as a collection of Short, whereas you are expecting it to be a collection of Byte
Uint8Array's toArray method notes:
This member is added by an implicit conversion from Uint8Array to
IterableOps[Short] performed by method iterableOps in scala.scalajs.js.LowestPrioAnyImplicits.
So the method is returning an Array[Short] which you then .map to convert the Shorts to Bytes.
In your answer you posted
input.toArray.map(_.toByte)
which is technically correct, but it has the downside of allocating an intermediate array of the Shorts. To avoid this allocation, you can perform the .map operation on a .view of the array, then call .toArray on the view.
Views in Scala (and by extension Scala.js) are lightweight objects that reference an original collection plus some kind of transformation/filtering function, which can be iterated like any other collection. You can compose many transformation/filters on a view without having to allocate intermediate collections to represent the results. See the docs page (linked) for more.
input.view.map(_.toByte).toArray
Depending on how you intend to pass the resulting value around, you may not even need to call .toArray. For example if all you need to do is iterate the elements later on, you could just pass the view around as an Iterable[Byte] without ever having to allocate a separate array.
All the current answers require iterating over the array in user space.
Scala.js has optimizer supported conversions for typed arrays (in fact, Array[Byte] are typed arrays in modern configs). You'll likely get better performance by doing this:
import scala.scalajs.js.typedarray._
def toScalaArray(input: Uint8Array): Array[Byte] = {
// Create a view as Int8 on the same underlying data.
new Int8Array(input.buffer, input.byteOffset, input.length).toArray
}
The additional new Int8Array is necessary to re-interpret the underlying buffer as signed (the Byte type is signed). Only then, Scala.js will provide the built in conversion to Array[Byte].
When looking at the generated code, you'll see no user space loop is necessary: The built-in slice method is used to copy the TypedArray. This will almost certainly not be beatable in terms of performance by any user-space loop.
$c_Lhelloworld_HelloWorld$.prototype.toScalaArray__sjs_js_typedarray_Uint8Array__AB = (function(input) {
var array = new Int8Array(input.buffer, $uI(input.byteOffset), $uI(input.length));
return new $ac_B(array.slice())
});
If we compare this with the currently accepted answer (input.view.map(_.toByte).toArray) we see quite a difference (comments mine):
$c_Lhelloworld_HelloWorld$.prototype.toScalaArray__sjs_js_typedarray_Uint8Array__AB = (function(input) {
var this$2 = new $c_sjs_js_IterableOps(input);
var this$5 = new $c_sc_IterableLike$$anon$1(this$2);
// We need a function
var f = new $c_sjsr_AnonFunction1(((x$1$2) => {
var x$1 = $uS(x$1$2);
return ((x$1 << 24) >> 24)
}));
new $c_sc_IterableView$$anon$1();
// Here's the view: So indeed no intermediate allocations.
var this$8 = new $c_sc_IterableViewLike$$anon$6(this$5, f);
var len = $f_sc_TraversableOnce__size__I(this$8);
var result = new $ac_B(len);
// This function actually will traverse.
$f_sc_TraversableOnce__copyToArray__O__I__V(this$8, result, 0);
return result
});
import scala.scalajs.js
def toScalaArray(input: js.typedarray.Uint8Array): Array[Byte] =
input.toArray.map(_.toByte)
Encountering a problem whereby I am specifying Private Constants at the start of a scala step definiton file which relies on a List Buffer element to be populated, however when compiling I get a 'IndexOutOfBoundsException' because the list is empty initially and only gets populated later in a for loop.
For Example I have the following 2 constants:
private val ConstantVal1= globalExampleList(2)
private val ConstantVal2= globalExampleList(3)
globalExampleList is populated further down in the file using a for loop:
for (i <- 1 to numberOfW) {
globalExampleList += x.xy }
This List Buffer adds as many values as required to a global mutable ListBuffer.
Is there a better way to declare these constants? I've tried to declare them after the for loop but then other methods are not able to access these. I have around 4 different methods within the same file which use these values and instead of accessing it via index each time i thought it would be better to declare them as a constant to keep it neat and efficient for whenever they require changing.
Thanks
You can create list buffer of necessary size with default value and populate it later:
val globalExampleList: ListBuffer[Int] = ListBuffer.fill(numberOfW)(0)
for (i <- 0 until numberOfW) {
globalExampleList(i) = x.xy
}
But ConstantVal1, ConstantVal2 will still have original default value. So you can make them vars and re-assign them after you populate the buffer.
Your code seems to have a lot of mutations and side effects.
You have 2 ways to go.
First you can use lazy modifier
private lazy val ConstantVal1= globalExampleList(2)
private lazy val ConstantVal2= globalExampleList(3)
Or you can write the two lines after the for loop.
val globalExampleList = XXXX
for (i <- 1 to numberOfW) { globalExampleList += x.xy }
private val ConstantVal1= globalExampleList(2)
private val ConstantVal2= globalExampleList(3)
When I write like this
List.<Dictionary.<String, System.Object>>,
the ide tells me
Assets/Scripts/yhj/Model/PrintItem.js(23,71): BCE0044: expecting >, found '>>.
How can I resolve it?
Why would you make a list of dictionaries? Can't you just use the dictionary as the list with the key, value input instead of this? If you wanted to use it like this I would either define an object to be the <String, System.Object> and inserting that as the value and just leave the key as the number.
Or making a list of objects where the object is the <String, System.Object>
#ILiveForVR makes me think about this.thanks.
I solved it, but I'm not sure if the solution is best.
I do it like this:
var list = List.<System.Object>;
for(var i=0;i<list.Count;i++){
var data = list[i] as Dictionary<String, System.Object>;
}
With the nDepend API, would something like the following be possible?
I want to keep a watch out for instances where our object factory has been bypassed and a concrete class is being instantiated directly.
Obviously I'd need to be able to filter out things like:
StringBuilder stringBuilder = new StringBuilder();
perhaps by adding to the Where clause type names to exclude, or namespaces in which to check, but I want to make sure we see:
IMyCustomType item = ObjectFactory.Get<IMyCustomType>();
and not this:
MyCustomType item = new MyCustomType();
Thanks.
Maybe such code rule below could help you, hopefully it is understandable enough to not have to comment it:
warnif count > 0
let ctors = Application.Namespaces.WithNameLike("Namespaces1*").ChildMethods().Where(m => m.IsConstructor)
let codeThatMustNotCallCtors = Application.Namespaces.WithNameLike("Namespaces2*").ChildMethods()
from m in codeThatMustNotCallCtors.UsingAny(ctors)
select new { m, ctorsCalled = m.MethodsCalled.Intersect(ctors ) }
Given I have the elmFinder variable:
var elmFinder = element(by.css('.thing'));
What if i need to get back the webdriver.Locator, a.k.a locator strategy? i.e.
elmFinder.??? //=> by.css('.thing')
I'm looking after the function ??? if it exists.
UPDATE:
This feature has been merged and we can now do:
elmFinder.locator();
UPDATE:
This feature has been merged and we can now do:
elmFinder.locator();
Old answer:
You cannot. The element finder does not keep a reference to the locator:
https://github.com/angular/protractor/blob/master/lib/protractor.js#L103
What I typically do is store the selector in it's own var, and then place that string into the selector, so I can use both interchangably:
var cssThingSelector = '.thing';
var elem = $(cssThingSelector);
Something like that.
Edit:
I will also add that you can nest findElement calls from selenium webelement objects.
So, if there is another item in the inner html of the .thing web element (say, a span tag), you could just nest another findElement call:
var spanElem = elem.$('span');
You can do this as much as you'd like.