I am searching a solution where I can replace a object content with other in a array of objects.
The thing is, I don't know what my function will pass, so I can't pass the values inside as keys directly, so the reference won't be copied, is there any way I can assign the value directly without passing the reference? I know that objects pass references and not values, but is there a way to do that?
I tried two ways:
state.document["atributes"].splice(state.document["atributes"][state.currentIndex],1,section);
And
state.document["atributes"][state.currentIndex] = section
Where my state.document["atributs"] is my array, and the state.currentIndex the index where I want to replace the element inside my array.
What happens at the moment is that my object can be a Table a paragraph etc.
If the objects are the same it replaces the content :/
Any help with this? Thank you
If you're only modify what in the currentIndex, try
Vue.set(state.document["atributes"], state.currentIndex, section)
Reference: Vue documentation
Related
I’m learning javascript and trying to write code that sorts a list, removing elements if they meet certain criteria.
I found this snippet that seems promising but don't have a clue how it works so I can adapt it to my needs:
list = document.getElementById("raffles-list").children; // Get a list of all open raffles on page
list = [].filter.call(list, function(j) {
if (j.getAttribute("style") === "") {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
});
Can you guys help me learn by explaining what this code block does?
It's getting all the children of the "raffles-list" element, then returning a filtered list of those that contain an empty "style" attribute.
The first line is pretty self-evident - it just retrieves the children from the element with id "raffles-list".
The second line is a little more complicated; it's taking advantage of two things: that [], which is an empty array, is really just an object with various methods/properties on it, and that the logic on the right hand side of the equals sign needs to be evaluated before "list" gets the new value.
Uses a blank array in order to call the "filter" method
Tells the filter to use list as the array to filter, and uses function(j) to do the filtering, where j is the item in the list being tested
If the item has a style attribute that is empty, i.e. has no style applied, it returns true.
Edit:
As per OP comment, [].filter is a prototype, so essentially an object which has various properties just like everything else. In this case filter is a method - see here. Normally you just specify an anonymous function/method that does the testing, however the author here has used the .call in order to specify an arbitrary object to do the testing on. It appears this is already built into the standard filter method, so I don't know why they did it this way.
Array like objects are some of javascript objects which are similar to arrays but with differences for example they don't implement array prototypes. If you want to achieve benefits of array over them (for example like question filter children of an element )you can do it this way:
Array.prototype.functionName.call(arrayLikeObject, [arg1, [arg2 ...]]);
Here in question array like is html element collection; and it takes items without any styling.
list is assigned a collection of elements that are children of the raffles-list element
list is then reassigned by filtering its elements as follows
an empty array is filtered by calling it with the parameter list and a callback function. The formal parameters for call are this (which is the list) and optionally further objects (in this case a callback function)
The callback function receives a formal parameter j and is called for each element
If the element's value for the style attribute is empty the element is retained in the array. Otherwise it is discarded.
At the end list should contain all elements that don't have a value for its style attribute
I have a list of unique ID's of a parent nodes children stored into childrenIDs.
var childrenIDs=["8b69b08e-d75e-6ef6-2cf4-275ff130cd74","42325602-9312-3565-b7dc-37383ca53c17", "2c91dcd6-7436-eff5-393e-cea8cbef338c"]
I then assign those IDs to the second element of another array
nodeArray[index].splice(0,1,childrenIDs);
When nodeArray[index][0] is entered into the console, the right output (containing all of the IDs) is printed. However, if I type childrenIDs.length = 0 to clear the first array, calling nodeArray[index][0] produces a null output. It seems as if nodeArr[index][0] is almost acting as a pointer to childrenIDs in the way that when childrenIDs is cleared, so is nodeArray[index][0].
I need to be able to reuse childrenIDs. Is there something wrong with how I am clearing the array and is there a way for me to preserve the data in nodeArray[index][0] after clearing childrenIDs?
Can you try using this statement?
nodeArray[index].splice(0,1,childrenIDs.slice(0));
Instead of assigning the array as child, you should assign a copy of it.
childrenIDs.slice(0)
Which would look like this:
nodeArray[index].splice(0,1,childrenIDs.slice(0));
This question already has an answer here:
Mutate JavaScript Array Inside Function
(1 answer)
Closed 8 years ago.
So it could just be I'm crazy tired but I can't seem to figure this out.
I've been picking up javascript which I'm finding horrible coming from actionscript 3 where everything was typed. I had a function that referenced two array variables directly, I later needed to use it again for a different data set so I've altered it to take parameters and now it's breaking.
I have one array full of elements, the 2nd is empty. When I call the function, a random element is removed from the first array and pushed into the 2nd array, that element is also returned by the function. If the 1st array is empty I have concat the 2nd array to fill it back up. The goal was to randomly iterate through the elements and not have the selected elements show up again until I had finished a full cycle.
Prior to concat I was using slice(which should work just as well?), the problem I believe is that I know have a parameter that is redefined when I do 'array = array2.slice()', concat doesn't seem to work around that. I don't know if returning the single sliced element from the first array is bad if I'm expecting a string, I think slice is returning an array with the single element, easy fix there though by adding [0] to the return statement.
Heres the code:
//Gets a random element from array, that element is moved from the 'src' array to the 'bin' array,
//this allows random selection without choosing the same element until all of 'src' array elements have been picked
function getRandomElement(array_src,array_bin){
//Randomly selects a tweet from the que, then stores it in another array so each tweet shows once before recycling
if(array_src.length==0 && array_bin.length>0) {array_src.concat(array_bin);} //Recycles array elements when the src array is empty
var randomElement = array_src.splice(Math.floor(Math.random()*array_src.length),1); //Grab a random array element
array_bin.push(randomElement);//array elements stored here to be recycled
return randomElement;
}
I think I could maybe use an object with two properties pointing to the arrays and pass those in, though it'd be nicer if there is a better way. I could also use push on array_src looping through the array_bin to work around that issue if there isn't any other way.
I wouldn't say this is a duplicate Felix. The answer you provided is pretty much the same, but the question itself is phrased differently, I wasn't aware of the term mutate, finding the question/answer wouldn't be easy, none of the suggested links SO provided were relevant. Worth keeping up for making the answer more discoverable to those unaware of the mutate term.
I have a hard time understanding the problem, but I think you are wondering why array_src.concat(array_bin) doesn't seem to do anything?
That's because .concat returns a new array. If you want to mutate the existing array_src array, you can use .push:
array_src.push.apply(array_src, array_bin);
FWIW, this has nothing to do with strong typing. JavaScript (and I guess ActionScript as well), is pass-by-value. That implies that assigning a new value to array_src doesn't change the value of the variable that was passed to getRandomElement.
But since arrays are mutable in JavaScript (and ActionScript I assume), you can mutate the array itself.
Would like to maintain a map/hash of DOM objects. Can they serve as key objects? If not, what are the alternatives, please? If there are better ways - kindly enlist them as well.
You can put anything as the key, but before actual use it is always converted to string, and that string is used as a key.
So, if you look at what domObject.toString() produces, you see it is not a good candidate. If all of your dom objects have an id, you could use that id.
If not, and you still desperately need a key based on DOM object, you probably could do with using, for example, _counter attribute with automatic counter in background putting new unique value in a DOM object if _counter is not yet present.
window already maintains all DOM objects as properties. Instead of putting your own keys for each 'DOM object' try to use window or document object and methods that uses index based on the layout of DOM tree.
No, because object keys are strings.
You'd have to "serialise" your objects by id or something, then perform a lookup later. Probably not worth it, depending on what your actual goal is here.
No, but you can set an attribute on the DOM element that contains a number, which you would have as the index in a numerically-indexed array.
Easiest is to set a data-attribute on the element instead.
Not exact. But I think you want something like below. You can do with jquery,
The .serializeArray() method creates a JavaScript array of objects, ready to be encoded as a JSON string. It operates on a jQuery object representing a set of form elements. The form elements can be of several types
Refer below link :
http://api.jquery.com/serializeArray/
Below is the snippet of the code. Basically, 'this.leaves' is a array. And I want to shift first array element, make copy of it (called frontLeaf), and unshift it to the original array, change some attributes from copied element, and put that element to the parent array element.
var frontLeaf = this.leaves.shift();
this.leaves.unshift(frontLeaf);
frontLeaf.leftChild = tmp;
frontLeaf.rightChild = this;
this.parent.leaves.push(frontLeaf);
My problem is that frontLeaf seems to be passed by reference that when I assign
frontLeaf.leftChild = tmp;
frontLeaf.rightChild = this;
above two lines of code seems to affect both elements in this.leaves and this.parent.leaves... So, How can I resolve this problem?
Javascript passes all objects by reference. The only way to do what you're looking for is to create an entirely new object, do a deep copy and then push it.
See this post for a sample solution using jQuery.
Yes, in JavaScript objects are always passed by reference. If you want a copy of an object, you'll have to write a deep-copy routine yourself.
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to do (what is tmp? what is this? what is this.leaves an array of?), but maybe there is a way to do it without needing a copy?
Here's what I did when faced the same issue:
var newObj = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(oldObj));