I am trying to call a function through javascript via my NPRuntime plugin
but when i pass an integer value to a function,chrome detects that as NPVariantType_Double while firefox is taking same as NPVariantType_Int32.
Can we do avoid this without modifying script to make sure that both firefox and chrome detects it as NPVariantType_Int32.
Short answer: no, not really. They will give it to you in the format that they decide to give it to you. I recommend you cast it to a int32.
If you're really worried about how it's going to come in and need the format to remain exactly the same, pass it as a string and use some form of lexical cast to convert it to the numeric format you need.
Remember that javascript is dynamically typed, so from their perspective it shouldn't matter. This is just one of those annoying things :-/ FireBreath "solves" this issue simply by not caring what the browser provides and converting it to the datatype the function says it expects.
Taxilian is right. Chrome and Opera(as far as I recall) are returning mainly NPVariantType_Double , even if this represents the location of an element (in pixels).You can create a function that converts NPVariantType_Double and NPVariantType_Int32 to whatever you want.
Related
I'm using GWT 2.9 with elemental2-1.0.0-RC1.
The following code throws a ClassCastException at runtime:
DocumentRange documentRange = Js.cast(DomGlobal.document); // Fails
Range range = documentRange.createRange(); // Never reaches here
When I change to use an Js.uncheckedCast() instead, it succeeds:
DocumentRange documentRange = Js.uncheckedCast(DomGlobal.document);
Range range = documentRange.createRange(); // Works
The documentation for Js.uncheckedCast() says:
"You should always prefer regular casting over this (unless you know what you are doing!)."
I don't know why I'm having to use it, so I'm feeling nervous. Can someone explain how Js.cast() performs its type-checking and why I need to use an Js.uncheckedCast() in this instance?
Js.cast() is a way to cheat a bit, and do something that the Java language will not permit, but might actually be legal. Ignoring "how it actually works", the idea is that you can now get past issues where Java would complain, even if it turns out to be legit.
An example could be where you take a java.lang.Double or double and want to treat it as a JsNumber so you can call toPrecision(2) on it. Since java.lang.Double is final, it isn't legal to cast to an unrelated type, but Java doesn't know that in GWT, Double is really just a js Number. So, instead you can perform the cast with Js.cast(). The compiler will insert a runtime type check in there, verifying at runtime that your number is in fact a JS Number instance.
Another example could be trying to extend some native type that elemental2 provides, either to implement a workaround for a missing feature, or to do something browser-specific. Your new class may not extend the existing class - from JS's perspective this is okay, you are just describing the API that you know will exist at runtime. As such, we need to avoid the Java language check of "does this cast even make sense?", and just tell the compiler to try it.
On the other hand, you can "lie" to the compiler with Js.uncheckedCast(). This is used in cases where you are even asking the runtime to skip the check, and just pretend that it will work. This can let you do weird things, like treating Strings as if they were arrays, or solve cross-frame problems. No runtime check will be emitted, so instead you might just get a TypeError if a method/property is missing, instead of a proper ClassCastException.
In elemental2-dom 1.0.0-RC1, there is a class called DocumentRange, but it doesnt really make any sense - it is declared as a class, which means it can be type checked in JS, but the browser spec says that it should be an "interface" (which in JS-land means that it just is a description of a type, rather than something you can typecheck). https://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-Traversal-Range/ranges.html#Level2-DocumentRange-method-createRange
This bug is inherited from closure-compiler, which claims that this has a constructor: https://github.com/google/closure-compiler/blob/6a418aa/externs/browser/w3c_range.js#L241-L251
The fix is for closure-compiler to refer to this as an interface, and for a new release of elemental2 to be made so you can use this.
There are two workarounds you can make here. The first is to cheat with Js.uncheckedCast(DomGlobal.document) and say "yes, I know that the Document is not instanceof DocumentRange, but that's because there is no such class as DocumentRange, so just pretend it worked so I can call createRange() on it". This is what you are doing already - it hides the fact there is a bug, but at the end of the day it works.
The "correct" answer is to declare your own DocumentRange, and do a Js.cast() to that instead. This is still gross - you have to keep your new interface around until closure gets fixed, and then elemental2 gets released, and then you have to remember to clean it up.
In this case, I would suggest lying to GWT and using Js.uncheckedCast() - there is only a single method on here, and it is unlikely to change in a meaningful way.
I am using QTP for automating an application. QTP recognizes Java applet- JTree as a html tag. In the html tag we have a number which is dynamic.
Hence we used Regular Expression so that QTP recognizes the object even if the number changes. But QTP is failing to do so. We have tested the regular expression in the evaluator and it works highlights the correct number as expected.
The expression in Obj Repository matches with the one in the Expert view.
Reg expressions do not work with html tags/applets is it??
Is there any other way to deal with dynamic elements in html tags??
Thanks in advance.
Try using descriptive programming it may help you. If you could provide more details of the issue then i could send you code snippet.
You should try UFT that is the next generation of QTP.
If you have a QTP-Licence you can update to UFT and I guess it will work well.
On the other hand how long will QTP will be supported
In G-WAN the default URL is in the form mydomain.com/?hello.c
I want to get rid of the ? to have URLs that look like mydomain.com/hello
The user manual mentions substituting a different character such as ' for ?. In that case the URL would look like mydomain.com/'hello.c
But I don't want to use a different character, I want to get rid of the special character completely. Is that possible?
The default language for G-WAN is C. So mydomain.com/?hello means mydomain.com/?hello.c
How do I change the default to a different language, say Java, so that mydomain.com/?hello now means mydomain.com/?hello.java
Can I set different default languages for different virtual hosts?
Finally, how do I change the URL format for passing parameters? According to the user manual the default format is:
mydomain.com/?hello.c&name=Eva
I want to change it to:
mydomain.com/hello?name=Eva
Is that possible?
This has already been asked many times, and a few solutions are found here:
G-WAN handler rewriting solution
You should note, however, that the way you mean to pass arguments as ?something=answer instead of & only applies to the first argument passed. You can't do ?this=that?somethingelse=this because only the first can be ? and the rest must be &. In fact you can ignore using ? completely and only use & with virtually unlimited arguments so it's in fact better to stick to only using &.
It's important to note for future reference to anyone asking similar questions, G-WAN gives you the entire headers through multiple steps of the HTTP transaction and being that you can modify them with c/c++, you can change anything at all that you want before the requests are handled by the server or sent back to the client. The only limitation is your knowledge and imagination.
Let us say that I have a Matlab function and I change its signature (i.e. add parameter). As Matlab does not 'compile' is there an easy way to determine which other functions do not use the right signature (i.e. submits the additional parameter). I do not want to determine this at runtime (i.e. get an error message) or have to do text searches. Hope this makes sense. Any feedback would be very much appreciated. Many thanks.
If I understand you correctly, you want to change a function's signature and find all functions/scripts/classes that call it in the "old" way, and change it to the "new" way.
You also indicated you don't want to do it at runtime, or do text searches, but there is no way to detect "incorrect" calls at "parse-time", so I'm afraid these demands leave no option at all to detect old function calls...
What I would do in that case is temporarily add a few lines to the new function:
function myFunc(param1, param2, newParam) % <-- the NEW signature
if nargin == 2
clc, error('old call detected.'); end
and then run the main script/function/whatever in which this function resides. You'll get one error for each time something calls the function incorrectly, along with the error stack in the Matlab command window.
It is then a matter of clicking on the link in the bottom of the error stack, correct the function call, and repeat from the top until no more errors occur.
Don't forget to remove these lines when you're done, or better, replace the word error with warning just to capture anything that was missed.
Better yet: if you're on linux, a text search would be a matter of
$ grep -l 'myFunc(.*,.*); *.m'
which will list all the files having the "incorrect" call. That's not too difficult I'd say...You can probably do a similar thing with the standard windows search, but I can't test that right now.
This is more or less what the dependency report was invented for. Using that tool, you can find what functions/scripts call your altered function. Then it is just a question of manually inspecting every occurrence.
However, I'd advise to make your changes to the function signature such that backwards compatibility is maintained. You can do so by specifying default values for new parameters and/or issuing a warning in those scenarios. That way, your code will run, and you will get run-time hints of deprecated code (which is more or less a necessary evil in interpreted/dynamic languages).
For many dynamic languages (and MATLAB specifically) it is generally impossible to fully inspect the code without the interpreter executing the code. Just imagine the following piece of code:
x = magic(10);
In general, you'd say that the magic function is called. However, magic could map to a totally different function. This could be done in ways that are invisible to a static analysis tool (such as the dependency report): e.g. eval('magic = 1:100;');.
The only way is to go through your whole code base, either inspecting every occurrence manually (which can be found easily with a text search) or by running a test that fully covers your code base.
edit:
There is however a way to access intermediate outputs of the MATLAB parser. This can be accessed using the undocumented and unsupported mtree function (which can be called like this: t = mtree(file, '-file'); for every file in your code base). Using the resulting structure you might be able to find calls with a certain amount of parameters.
Lets say for example I write many times priavte instead private.
Is there a way to let Eclipse automatically fix my common typo?
Something like construct a map of my common typo to its desire fix,
and then just let Eclipse fix it without asking me about that.
Are there any other IDE\editors that have such support?
There is no builtin support for automatically changing strings. The closest to your request are the templates of the Java editor, but even those must explicitly be activated using CtrlSpace.
To get around your problem, I suggest simply not to write that much yourself. If you want to declare a private field, type just "pr" and hit CtrlSpace to invoke code completion. Eclipse can do code completion quite well, often even without any trigger characters (try it with an empty class file).