Edit: the code below was made up on the spot to show how I was going about what I was doing. It definietely won't run, it is missing a lot of things.
Here is a working example in codepen: https://codepen.io/goducks/pen/XvgpYW
much shorter example: https://codepen.io/goducks/pen/ymXMyB
When creating a function that is using call or apply, the this value stays null when using getPerson. however, when I use apply or call with getPerson it returns the correct person.
Please critique, I am really starting to learn more and more. I am in the middle of a project section so it might be hard to change all the code, but my next project could implement this better.
call and apply are setting to the window and not the object.
I will provide code that is much simpler with the same concept of what I am talking about.
function createPerson(){
this.manager = null;
this.teamManager = null;
this.setTeamManager = function(val){
this.teamManager = val;
}
this.setManager = function(val){
console.log('setting manager to',val);
this.teamManager = val;
}
this.getTeamManager = function(){
console.log('setting team manager to',val);
return this.teamManager ;
}
this.getManager = function(){
return this.manager;
}
this.appendSelect = function(elem){
var that = this;
createOtherSelects(that,elem);
}
//some functions that create selects with managers etc
//now assume there are other selects that will filter down the teams,
//so we might have a function that creates on change events
function createOtherSelects(that){
//code that creates locations, depending on location chosen will
//filter the managers
$('#location').on('change',function(){
//do some stuff
//... then call create management
createManagement(that,elem);
});
}
function createManagement(that,elem){
var currentLocation = that.location; //works
var area = that.area;//works ... assume these are set above
//code that returns a filter and unique set of managers back
that.teamManager = [...new Set(
data.map(person=>{
if(person.area==area &&
person.currentLocation==currentLocation
){
return person;
}
})
)].filter(d=>{if(d){return d}});
if(elem.length>0){
var selectNames = ['selectManager','selectTeamManager'];
var fcns = [that.setManager,that.setTeamManager];
for(var i = 0; i < selectNames.length;i++){
//do stuff
if(certainCriteriaMet){
// filter items
if(filteredManager == 1){
fcns[i].call(null,currentManager);//
}
}
}
}
}
}
var xx = new createPerson()
In console I see setting manager and setting team manager to with the correct values.
however when I call xx in console, I see everything else set except for
xx.teamManager and xx.manager
instead it is applying to the window, so if I type teamManager in the console, it will return with the correct person.
If I straight up say
that.setManager('Steve')
or even it works just fine.
xx.setManager('steve')
the this value in setManager is somehow changing from the current instance of the object to this window. I don't know why, and I would like to learn how to use apply and call using that for future reference.
I think the issue is with your following code
fcns[i].call(null,currentManager)
If you are not supplying "this" to call, it will be replaced with global object in non-strict mode.
fcns[i].call(that,currentManager)
See mdn article here
From your codepen example, you need to change that line
fcnset[0].apply(that,[randomName]);
The first argument of the apply method is the context, if you are not giving it the context of your method it's using the global context be default. That's why you end up mutating the window object, and not the one you want !
Related
In Screeps, I this code doesn't work:
var sources = creep.room.find(Game.FIND_SOURCES_ACTIVE);
It says this:
Cannot read property 'find' of undefined
I have been looking around and cannot find ANY other way to find sources.
Also I've noticed that most of other peoples code doesn't work and even the tutorial's code no longer works when put into the real game.
I can't be completely sure about your issue since I don't have your complete code to go off of but one issue could be that creepis not defined.
You need somewhere in your code to define creep such as a for loop to loop over each of your creeps in the game or room.
var roleMiner = require('role.miner') // role.miner being the module name for miner actions
for(var name in Game.creeps) {
var creep = Game.creeps[name];
//
// do whatever you wish with the current selected creep.
//
// most of the time you will call a module similar to what the tutorials suggest and put your actions for it in there
//
if(creep.memory.role == 'miner'){
roleMiner.run(creep); // passes the current selected creep to the run function in the module
}
}
So, in your roleMiner module you would have something that defines your miners actions.
var roleMiner = {
run: function(creep) {
// this one returns an array of the sources that are in the room with the creep
var sourcesRoom = creep.room.find(FIND_SOURCES);
// this one returns the source object which is closest to the creeps positon
var sourcesClose = creep.pos.findClosestByRange(FIND_SOURCES);
}
}
module.exports = roleMiner;
Hope this helps.
Screeps have some ... mechanism when sharing your data between each game tick.
If you store any thing in global Memory object, your data will lose all its prototype.
to restore your prototype use Object.setPrototypeOf(creep,Creep.prototype) or create new Creep object from your creep id.
I think what you are looking for is:
var sources = creep.pos.findClosestByRange(Game.SOURCES);
or
var sources = creep.pos.findClosestByPath(Game.SOURCES);
im a new player, not sure my code is efficient, i think the find method will be like this:
var sources = creep.room.find(FIND_SOURCES_ACTIVE)
creep will going to the active resource to harvester.
I'd like to retrieve an instance of some js Class with only the value of a parameter
lets say :
function myClass(id)
{
this.id = id
}
myClass.prototype.sayHello = function()
{
alert('hello');
}
myClass.instanceFromID = function()
{
...
}
var instance1 = new myClass(22);
var instance2 = new myClass(33);
var instance3 = new myClass(232);
var instance4 = new myClass(1533);
I would love to be able to access the instance by some method like
myClass.instanceFromID(33).sayHello();
I've been thinking of 2 solutions but they seam overkill :
First idea:
storing all the instances in an array, (global scope or static to the class) and iterating over all of them to find and return the instance, but this implies to keep track, add and remove the instances from the array.
Second idea:
make each instance listen to a custom event triggered from the document and compare the data emitted with inner parameter to check if it is concerned and emit a signal back to the document.
How can I achieve this in a simple way or is there no other way than these 2?
Based on what you've written, having the class itself keep track of instances with an instance variable seems to be the approach you're looking for. Of course, this means that instances will never be garbage collected unless you explicitly release them. But perhaps that isn't an issue for you. Here's how I would tackle this:
function MyClass(id) {
this.id = id;
MyClass.instances[id] = this;
}
MyClass.instances = {};
MyClass.instanceFromId = function(id) {
return MyClass.instances[id];
}
I'm doing a Linked List data structure. The prototype includes a method to pop (delete) the last item from the list which I'm attempting to do by finding the last object, and then setting it to null. It does not seem to work. What does work is setting the reference (the 'pointer') in the previous object to null. I'm still a relative JS OOP newbie, can't get my brain to understand why. The code:
function LinkedList() {
this._rootNode = null;
this._length = 0;
}
LinkedList.prototype = {
push: function(data) {
var newNode = {
data: data,
nextNode: null
};
// initialize this._rootNode or subsequent .nextNode with newNode
this._length++;
},
pop: function() {
var selectedNode, perviousNode;
if ( this._rootNode ) {
if ( this._length > 1 ) {
selectedNode = this._rootNode;
while ( selectedNode.nextNode ) {
previousNode = selectedNode; // <-- shouldn't need this?
selectedNode = selectedNode.nextNode;
}
selectedNode = null; // <-- doesn't delete it
// previousNode.nextNode = null; // <-- works (but feels unnecessary?)
} else {
this._rootNode = null;
}
this._length--;
}
},
// more methods..
};
/* --- Main Prorgam --- */
var list = new LinkedList();
list.push('AAA');
list.push('BBB');
list.pop();
console.log(list._rootNode.nextNode.data); <-- 'BBB' still there
Would appreciate some insight, and any other tips on improving the function. Thanks!
I guess you realize that your push method doesn't work, but you haven't asked about that one.
If you are doing some kind of school project that requires you to write a linked list like this, then by all means, continue. Your issue is that selectedNode is not really "the node itself", it's a reference to it, and you're just setting that reference to null while the previous item's nextNode pointer still refers to it, so you haven't actually removed it from your list. You would actually do so by un-commenting the line setting that pointer to null, which means you also have to leave in the line saving the reference to the previous node.
previousNode.nextNode = null;
You actually don't want to delete the node entirely with pop(), you want to return it. Once you remove the reference to the popped node in your calling function though, it will be the last reference and the object will be made available for garbage collection. This is (to my knowledge) how all traditional OOP languages handle linked lists at the basic level.
Which brings me to my next point, that most OOP languages you'll use these days don't actually require you to work on the basic level. Most of them have libraries that will implement linked lists for you and Javascript in particular essentially implements a linked list-style data structure in its array syntax. To the point where ([1,2,3,4]).pop() evaluates to 4 and ([1,2,3,4]).push(5) evaluates to [1,2,3,4,5]. If you actually need to USE a linked list in a real project, just don't.
I need a Set that has the API similar to the Set in Java.
This implementation:
http://jsclass.jcoglan.com/set.html
Requires the use of RequireJS, which requires my Java brain to twist too much at the moment.
Posting a function that is the functionality for Set would be a great answer.
Or a link to a Google Set or some other tech giant who has created this code already.
What about Google's Closure? The name confused me but it has a set.
In my opinion whatever java.util.Set can achieve can be done using simple javascript object. I don't see why you need additional library:
// empty set
var basket = {};
// adding object to set
basket['apple'] = true;
basket['banana'] = true;
basket['orange'] = true;
basket['apple'] = true;
// iterating through set contents, should print:
// apple
// banana
// orange
for(var fruit in basket)
console.log(fruit);
// check if an element exist
if(basket['pineapple']) {
console.log('has pineapple');
} else {
console.log('no pineapple');
}
// remove element from set
delete basket['apple'];
I want to create an object that can parse a certain filetype. I've looked at some of the files in the File API and I want my object to work about the same. So basically, what I want is this:
A function, called CustomFileParser. I want to be able to use it as the following:
var customFileParser = new CustomFileParser();
customFileParser.parsed = paresed;
customFileParser.progress = progress;
customFileParser.parse(file);
function parsed(event){
//The file is loaded, you can do stuff with it here.
}
function progess(event){
//The file load has progressed, you can do stuff with it here.
}
So I was thinking on how to define this object, but I'm not sure how to define these events and how I should do this.
function customFileParser(){
this.parse = function(){
//Do stuff here and trigger event when it's done...
}
}
However, I'm not sure how to define these events, and how I can do this. Anyone can give me a hand?
Javscript is prototype-based OOP language, not class-based like most other popular languages. Therefore, the OOP constructs are a bit different from what you might be used to. You should ignore most websites that try to implement class-based inheritance in JS, since that's not how the language is meant to be used.
The reason people are doing it because they are used to the class-based system and are usually not even aware that are alternatives to that, so instead of trying to learn the correct way, they try to implement the way that they are more familiar with, which usually results in loads and loads of hacks or external libraries that are essentially unnecessary.
Just use the prototype.
function CustomFileParser(onParsed, onProgress) {
// constructor
this.onParsed = onParsed;
this.onProgress = onProgress;
};
CustomFileParser.prototype.parse = function(file) {
// parse the file here
var event = { foo: 'bar' };
this.onProgress(event);
// finish parsing
this.onParsed(event);
};
And you can use it like so
function parsed(event) {
alert(event);
}
function progress(event) {
alert(event);
}
var customFileParser = new CustomFileParser(parsed, progress);
var file = ''; // pseudo-file
customFileParser.parse(file);
From what it sounds to me i think you need your program to look like this
function customFileParser( onparse , progress){
this.onparse = onparse;
this.progressStatus = 0;
this.progress = progress;
this.parser = function (chunk)
}
this.parse = function(){
// Do stuff of parsing
// Determine how much data is it
// Now make a function that parses a bit of data in every run
// Keep on calling the function till the data is getting parsed
// THat function should also increase the percentage it think this can be done via setTimeout.
// After every run of the semi parser function call the progress via something like
this.parser();
if(progressStatus <100){
this.progress(this.progressStatus);
}else{
this.parsed();
}
}
}
and u can create instance of that object like
var dark = new customFileParser( function () { // this tells what to
do what parsed is complete } , function (status) { // this tells what
to do with the progress status } ) ;
using the method i suggested. you can actually define different methods for all the instances of the object you have !