We Keep Coding

Why is the value of a specific key for a doc getting 'undefined' [duplicate]

Is there something that I'm missing that would allow item to log as an object with a parameter, but when I try to access that parameter, it's undefined?
What I've tried so far:
console.log(item) => { title: "foo", content: "bar" } , that's fine
console.log(typeof item) => object
console.log(item.title) => "undefined"
I'll include some of the context just in case it's relevant to the problem.
var TextController = function(myCollection) {
this.myCollection = myCollection
}
TextController.prototype.list = function(req, res, next) {
this.myCollection.find({}).exec(function(err, doc) {
var set = new Set([])
doc.forEach(function(item) {
console.log(item) // Here item shows the parameter
console.log(item.title) // "undefined"
set.add(item.title)
})
res.json(set.get());
})
}
Based on suggestion I dropped debugger before this line to check what item actually is via the node repl debugger. This is what I found : http://hastebin.com/qatireweni.sm
From this I tried console.log(item._doc.title) and it works just fine.. So, this seems more like a mongoose question now than anything.
There are questions similar to this, but they seem to be related to 'this' accessing of objects or they're trying to get the object outside the scope of the function. In this case, I don't think I'm doing either of those, but inform me if I'm wrong. Thanks

Solution
You can call the toObject method in order to access the fields. For example:
var itemObject = item.toObject();
console.log(itemObject.title); // "foo"
Why
As you point out that the real fields are stored in the _doc field of the document.
But why console.log(item) => { title: "foo", content: "bar" }?
From the source code of mongoose(document.js), we can find that the toString method of Document call the toObject method. So console.log will show fields 'correctly'. The source code is shown below:
var inspect = require('util').inspect;
...
/**
* Helper for console.log
*
* #api public
*/
Document.prototype.inspect = function(options) {
var isPOJO = options &&
utils.getFunctionName(options.constructor) === 'Object';
var opts;
if (isPOJO) {
opts = options;
} else if (this.schema.options.toObject) {
opts = clone(this.schema.options.toObject);
} else {
opts = {};
}
opts.minimize = false;
opts.retainKeyOrder = true;
return this.toObject(opts);
};
/**
* Helper for console.log
*
* #api public
* #method toString
*/
Document.prototype.toString = function() {
return inspect(this.inspect());
};

Make sure that you have defined title in your schema:
var MyCollectionSchema = new mongoose.Schema({
_id: String,
title: String
});

Try performing a for in loop over item and see if you can access values.
for (var k in item) {
console.log(item[k]);
}
If it works, it would mean your keys have some non-printable characters or something like this.
From what you said in the comments, it looks like somehow item is an instance of a String primitive wrapper.
E.g.
var s = new String('test');
typeof s; //object
s instanceof String; //true
To verify this theory, try this:
eval('(' + item + ')').title;
It could also be that item is an object that has a toString method that displays what you see.
EDIT: To identify these issues quickly, you can use console.dir instead of console.log, since it display an interactive list of the object properties. You can also but a breakpoint and add a watch.

Use findOne() instead of find().
The find() method returns an array of values, even if you have only one possible result, you'll need to use item[0] to get it.
The findOne method returns one object or none, then you'll be able to access its properties with no issues.

Old question, but since I had a problem with this too, I'll answer it.
This probably happened because you're using find() instead of findOne(). So in the end, you're calling a method for an array of documents instead of a document, resulting in finding an array and not a single document. Using findOne() will let you get access the object normally.

A better way to tackle an issue like this is using doc.toObject() like this
doc.toObject({ getters: true })
other options include:
getters: apply all getters (path and virtual getters)
virtuals: apply virtual getters (can override getters option)
minimize: remove empty objects (defaults to true)
transform: a transform function to apply to the resulting document before returning
depopulate: depopulate any populated paths, replacing them with their original refs (defaults to false)
versionKey: whether to include the version key (defaults to true)
so for example you can say
Model.findOne().exec((err, doc) => {
if (!err) {
doc.toObject({ getters: true })
console.log('doc _id:', doc._id) // or title
}
})
and now it will work

You don't have whitespace or funny characters in ' title', do you? They can be defined if you've quoted identifiers into the object/map definition. For example:
var problem = {
' title': 'Foo',
'content': 'Bar'
};
That might cause console.log(item) to display similar to what you're expecting, but cause your undefined problem when you access the title property without it's preceding space.

I think using 'find' method returns an array of Documents.I tried this and I was able to print the title
for (var i = 0; i < doc.length; i++) {
console.log("iteration " + i);
console.log('ID:' + docs[i]._id);
console.log(docs[i].title);
}

If you only want to get the info without all mongoose benefits, save i.e., you can use .lean() in your query. It will get your info quicker and you'll can use it as an object directly.
https://mongoosejs.com/docs/api.html#query_Query-lean
As says in docs, this is the best to read-only scenarios.

Are you initializing your object?
function MyObject()
{
this.Title = "";
this.Content = "";
}
var myo1 = new MyObject();
If you do not initialize or have not set a title. You will get undefined.

When you make tue query, use .lean() E.g
const order = await Order.findId("84578437").lean()

find returns an array of object , so to access element use indexing, like
doc[0].title

Angular2 bind ngModel from ngFor

So I'm rendering my textarea dynamically using ngFor however I'm not sure how I can pass the ngModel to bind it in my function.
<div *ngFor="let inputSearch of searchBoxCount; let i = index" [ngClass]="{'col-sm-3': swaggerParamLength=='3', 'col-sm-9': swaggerParamLength=='1'}">
<textarea name="{{inputSearch.name}}" id="{{inputSearch.name}}" rows="3" class="search-area-txt" attr.placeholder="Search Product {{inputSearch.name}}"
[(ngModel)]="inputSearch.name"></textarea>
</div>
textarea example:
textarea is render based on the length of the response I get from api call in my case searchBoxCount is basically searchBoxCount.length, so if it length is = 1 then it will only render 1 textarea if its 3 then it will show 3 textareas. The objs have different names (example: id/email/whatever), so ngModel is based on the obj name from the json object.
How do I bind inputSearch.name to my function getQueryString()
getQueryString() {
this.isLoading = true;
let idInputValue = inputSearch.name; //bind it here
return "?id=" + idInputValue
.split("\n") // Search values are separated by newline and put it in array collection.
.filter(function(str) {
return str !== ""
})
.join("&id=");
}
Search func where getQueryString() is called
searchProduct() {
let queryString1 = this.getQueryString();
this._searchService.getProduct(queryString1)
.subscribe(data => {
console.log(data);
});
}
I know how to do it if the ngModel is not coming from the ngFor, is there another way to get the value from the textarea without ngModel? maybe that's the only way or if I can still use ngModel.

Summary of current state
First, let me summarize where your data is. You have a list of one or more objects named searchBoxCount. Each of the elements in the list is an object which has a name property, so you could, for example, call let name = this.searchBoxCount[0].name; to get the name of the first object in the list.
In the HTML template you use ngFor to loop through all of the objects in the searchBoxCount list, and in each iteration you assign the object to a local (to the ngFor) variable named inputSearch. You then bind the input from the textarea created in each loop iteration to the name property for that iteration's inputSearch object.
How to get your data
The key here is that the inputSearch is the same Object as is stored in searchBoxCount at some particular index (index 0 for the first object, etc...). So when the ngModel is tied to inputSearch.name it is also bout to searchBoxCount[n].name. External to the ngFor, you would loop through the searchBoxCount list to get each name you need.
As a consequence
Based on the comments on the original post, it sounds like you can have one or
more names that you need to include in the query string output. That means for your getQueryString() to work, you have to loop through the list (or as in this case, let the list loop for us):
getQueryString() {
this.isLoading = true;
let result : string = "?id=";
this.searchBoxCount.forEach(
(inputSearch:any) => { //Not the same variable, but same objects as in the ngFor
result = result + inputSearch.name + "&id=";
});
result = result.slice(0, result.length - 4); //trim off the last &id=
return result;
}
Edit: Multiple different fields with different names
From the comments on this post, it now is clear each inputSearch has its own key to be used in the query string, that is stored in the name property. You need to preserve that name, which means you can't bind the ngModel to it. Otherwise the user will destroy the name by typing in their own text and there will be no way to get the correct key back. To that end, you need to store bind the ngModel to some other property of the inputSearch object. I am going to assume the object has a value property, so it looks like this:
{
name: "id",
value: "33\n44"
}
That is, each inputSearch has a name, and the value will have one or more values, separated by new line. You would then have to change the HTML template to this:
<div *ngFor="let inputSearch of searchBoxCount; let i = index"
[ngClass]="{'col-sm-3': swaggerParamLength=='3', 'col-sm-9':
swaggerParamLength=='1'}">
<textarea name="{{inputSearch.name}}"
id="{{inputSearch.name}}" rows="3" class="search-area-txt"
attr.placeholder="Search Product {{inputSearch.name}}"
[(ngModel)]="inputSearch.value"></textarea>
</div>
Notice that I changed the ngModel from inputSearch.name to inputSearch?.value (the ? allows for null if there is no value to begin with) inputSearch.value. The getQueryString() method then looks something like this:
getQueryString() {
let result:string = "?";
//for each of the input search terms...
this.searchBoxCount.forEach( (inputSearch:any) => {
// first reparse the input values to individual key value pairs
let inputValues:string = inputSearch.value.split("\n")
.filter(function(str) { return str !== "" })
.join("&" + inputSearch.name + "=");
// then add it to the overall query string for all searches
result = result +
inputSearch.name +
"=" +
inputValues +
"&"
});
// remove trailing '&'
result = result.slice(0, result.length - 1);
return result;
}
Note, using RxJs this is probably easier but I am testing vanilla javascript.
Using this, if the user entered two IDs (33 and 44), a single sku, and two emails, the result would be ?id=33&id=24&sku=abc123&email=name#compa.ny&email=an.other#compa.ny

Custom filter on 'ng-repeat' does overwrite the scope

My aim is to replace the teacher-id(f_teacher) of one outputted array with the teacher name of another array. I wrote a custom filter, that should do the job:
angular.module('core')
.filter('replaceId', function () { //filter, which replaces Id's of one array, with corresponding content of another array
return function (t_D, s_D, t_prop, s_prop) { //data of target, data of source, target property, source property
var replacment = {};
var output = [];
angular.forEach(s_D, function (item) {
replacment[item.id] = item[s_prop]; //replacment - object is filled with 'id' as key and corresponding value
});
angular.forEach(t_D, function (item) {
item[t_prop] = replacment[item[t_prop]]; //ids of target data are replaced with matching value
output.push(item);
});
return output;
}
});
I use a 'ng-repeat' like this:
<tr ng-repeat="class in $ctrl.classes | filter:$ctrl.search | replaceId:$ctrl.teachers:'f_teacher':'prename' | orderBy:sortType:sortReverse">
<td>{{class.level}}</td>
<td>{{class.classNR}}</td>
<td>{{class.f_teacher}}</td>
</tr>
But it only outputs an empty column. Now the strange thing: If I follow the steps with the debugger, it works for the first time the filter is performed. But when it is performed a second time it outputs an empty column.
I noticed that the returned object of the filter overwrites the $ctrl.classes - array, but normally this shouldn't be the case?
Here is a plnkr:
https://plnkr.co/edit/EiW59gbcLI5XmHCS6dIs?p=preview
Why is this happening?
Thank you for your time :)

The first time through your filter the code takes the f_teacher id and replaces it with the teacher name. The second time through it tries to do the same thing except now instead of getting a teachers ID in f_teacher it finds the teacher's name so it doesn't work. You could fix it by making a copy of the classes instead of modifying them directly. e.g.
angular.forEach(t_D, function (item) {
var itemCopy = angular.copy(item);
itemCopy[t_prop] = replacment[itemCopy[t_prop]];
output.push(itemCopy);
});
https://plnkr.co/edit/RDvBGITSAis3da6sWnyi?p=preview
EDIT
Original solution will trigger an infinite digest because the filter returns new instances of objects every time it runs which will cause angular to think something has changed and retrigger a digest. Could you just have a getter function that gets a teachers name instead of using a filter?
$scope.getTeacherName = function(id) {
var matchingTeachers = $scope.teachers.filter(function(teacher) {
return teacher.id == id;
})
//Should always be exactly 1 match.
return matchingTeachers[0].prename;
};
And then in the HTML you could use it like
<tr ng-repeat="class in classes">
<td>{{class.level}}</td>
<td>{{class.classNR}}</td>
<td>{{getTeacherName(class.f_teacher)}}</td>
</tr>
https://plnkr.co/edit/gtu03gQHlRIMsh9vxr1c?p=preview

AngularJs why is object undefined on ng-disabled function?

VIEW:
I have a rows repeating , with a save button on each row to save each object individually. I want this button to be disabled if no changes have been made.
<tr ng-repeat="option in options | filter:search">
<a ng-click="save(option)" ng-disabled="isUnchanged(option)">Save</a>
</tr>
CONTOLLER:
So I pass the option object to the function, I get its index position in the array. Then compare this 'option' object to its original self in apiKeyOptions[index] which is injected as a service.
angular.module('PartOfApp')
.controller('PartOfAppCtrl', function( $scope, ... apiKeyOptions) {
$scope.options = apiKeyOptions;
$scope.isUnchanged = function(option) {
var index = $scope.options.indexOf(option);
//compare object to the original
if(option.value == apiKeyOptions[index].value && apiKeyOptions[index].setting == option.setting){
//then no changes have been made to this
return true;
}else{
return false;
}
For some reason I get a console of 100's of errors when any data is changed, saying that the apiKeyOptions[index].value and apiKeyOptions[index].setting are undefind.
The app works perfectly as it should returning true if they are the same but still throws a
TypeError: Cannot read property 'value' of undefined
on apiKeyOptions[index]
if I console.log(apiKeyOptions[index].value) I get no undefined values and all log correctly.
Im guessing Im breaking some angular rules, if anyone could help that would be great.
apiKeyOptions overview:
apiKeyOptions is an array of up to 50 objects
each object is in the form
{
defaultValue: boolean,
description: null,
name: String,
setting: "Default" or Boolean,
value: Boolean
}
Added after comment below:
If I add-
console.log(index);
console.log(apiKeyOptions[index]);
to the function $scope.isUnchanged, I get the expected results
example :
13
Object {name: "LOREM IPSUM", description: null, defaultValue: false, setting: "default", value: false…}
So index is not always -1. The reason I pass the object to the function and not $index is because of the filter | search so the index will change depending on the search.
FIXED
As shown in the answer below . I was getting a index = -1 error but its was buried in 100's of CORRECT log outputs.
Oddly this did not stop the app from working and I will need to have a deeper look into how ng-disabled is bound to a value. To fix I simply replaced the indexOf with
for (var i = 0; i< $scope.options.length; i++ ){
if($scope.options[i].name == option.name){
var index = i;
}
}

The problem seems to be with the parameter passed to $scope.isUnchanged = function(option) {
Since ng-repeat creates a new scope for each loop, i suspect that the 'option' available to each loop would be a new object and will not have a reference to 'options' array.
<tr ng-repeat="option in options | filter:search">
Therefore your isUnchanged function will receive parameter as a new object and hence below code always returns -1. Because indexOf matches the given argument in the array and since the argument 'option' is an object and doesn't refer(reference comparison) the same element of array hence no match will found. i.e var a = {id:1};var b = [a]; b.indexOf({id:1}) === -1; b.indexOf(a) === 0;
var index = $scope.options.indexOf(option);//always be -1 in your case
// therefore apiKeyOptions[index] will always be undefined
As a workaround you should pass $index to isUnchanged from the view.

does Backbone.Models this.get() copy an entire array or point to the same array in memory

Person = Backbone.Model.extend({
defaults: {
name: 'Fetus',
age: 0,
children: []
},
initialize: function(){
alert("Welcome to this world");
},
adopt: function( newChildsName ){
var children_array = this.get("children");
children_array.push( newChildsName );
this.set({ children: children_array });
}
});
var person = new Person({ name: "Thomas", age: 67, children: ['Ryan']});
person.adopt('John Resig');
var children = person.get("children"); // ['Ryan', 'John Resig']
In this example code we have:
children_array = this.get("children")
I was thinking this would just point to the same array in memory (and so would be O(1)). However then I thought that would be a design floor because one could manipulate the array without using this.set() and then event listeners wouldn't fire.
So I'm guessing it (somehow magically) copies the array??
http://backbonejs.org/#Model-set
What happens?
edit: I just found the implementation in the backbone source code at https://github.com/documentcloud/backbone/blob/master/backbone.js (I've pasted relevant code at bottom)
Get returns:
return this.attributes[attr]
so this would just point to the same array in memory right? So one could change the array without using set() and that would be bad.. ? am i correct?
get: function(attr) {
return this.attributes[attr];
},
// Get the HTML-escaped value of an attribute.
escape: function(attr) {
var html;
if (html = this._escapedAttributes[attr]) return html;
var val = this.get(attr);
return this._escapedAttributes[attr] = _.escape(val == null ? '' : '' + val);
},
// Returns `true` if the attribute contains a value that is not null
// or undefined.
has: function(attr) {
return this.get(attr) != null;
},
// Set a hash of model attributes on the object, firing `"change"` unless
// you choose to silence it.
set: function(key, value, options) {
var attrs, attr, val;
// Handle both `"key", value` and `{key: value}` -style arguments.
if (_.isObject(key) || key == null) {
attrs = key;
options = value;
} else {
attrs = {};
attrs[key] = value;
}
// Extract attributes and options.
options || (options = {});
if (!attrs) return this;
if (attrs instanceof Model) attrs = attrs.attributes;
if (options.unset) for (attr in attrs) attrs[attr] = void 0;
// Run validation.
if (!this._validate(attrs, options)) return false;
// Check for changes of `id`.
if (this.idAttribute in attrs) this.id = attrs[this.idAttribute];
var changes = options.changes = {};
var now = this.attributes;
var escaped = this._escapedAttributes;
var prev = this._previousAttributes || {};
// For each `set` attribute...
for (attr in attrs) {
val = attrs[attr];
// If the new and current value differ, record the change.
if (!_.isEqual(now[attr], val) || (options.unset && _.has(now, attr))) {
delete escaped[attr];
(options.silent ? this._silent : changes)[attr] = true;
}
// Update or delete the current value.
options.unset ? delete now[attr] : now[attr] = val;
// If the new and previous value differ, record the change. If not,
// then remove changes for this attribute.
if (!_.isEqual(prev[attr], val) || (_.has(now, attr) !== _.has(prev, attr))) {
this.changed[attr] = val;
if (!options.silent) this._pending[attr] = true;
} else {
delete this.changed[attr];
delete this._pending[attr];
}
}
// Fire the `"change"` events.
if (!options.silent) this.change(options);
return this;
},

The documented interface doesn't actually specify who owns the array reference so you're on your own here. If you look at the implementation, you'll see (as you did) that get just returns a reference straight out of the model's internal attributes. This works fine with immutable types (such as numbers, strings, and booleans) but runs into problems with mutable types such as arrays: you can easily change something without Backbone having any way of knowing about it.
Backbone models appear to be intended to contain primitive types.
There are three reasons to call set:
That's what the interface specification says to do.
If you don't call set, you don't trigger events.
If you don't call set, you'll bypass the validation logic that set has.
You just have to be careful if you're working with array and object values.
Note that this behavior of get and set is an implementation detail and future versions might get smarter about how they handle non-primitive attribute values.
The situation with array attributes (and object attributes for that matter) is actually worse than you might initially suspect. When you say m.set(p, v), Backbone won't consider that set to be a change if v === current_value_of_p so if you pull out an array:
var a = m.get(p);
then modify it:
a.push(x);
and send it back in:
m.set(p, a);
you won't get a "change" event from the model because a === a; Backbone actually uses Underscore's isEqual combined with !== but the effect is the same in this case.
For example, this simple bit of chicanery:
var M = Backbone.Model.extend({});
var m = new M({ p: [ 1 ] });
m.on('change', function() { console.log('changed') });
console.log('Set to new array');
m.set('p', [2]);
console.log('Change without set');
m.get('p').push(3);
console.log('Get array, change, and re-set it');
var a = m.get('p'); a.push(4); m.set('p', a);
console.log('Get array, clone it, change it, set it');
a = _(m.get('p')).clone(); a.push(5); m.set('p', a);​
produces two "change" events: one after the first set and one after the last set.
Demo: http://jsfiddle.net/ambiguous/QwZDv/
If you look at set you'll notice that there is some special handling for attributes that are Backbone.Models.
The basic lesson here is simple:
If you're going to use mutable types as attribute values, _.clone them on the way out (or use $.extend(true, ...) if you need a deep copy) if there is any chance that you'll change the value.