Is there an api implementation for "decorating" a string pattern in Ace Editor (or how would you do it)?
Say you have two variables with ids and names. E.g.:
{
"$id1": "variable_1_name",
"$id2": "varialbe_2_name",
}
You pass the editor the value $id1 + $id2 but want it rendered as variable_1_name + variable_2_name ?
I'm looking for something similar to how draftjs handles this use case: https://draftjs.org/docs/advanced-topics-decorators
Related
How do I write this test in Cypress?
enter image description here
I have to confirm that either the headline or paragraph should contain the same keyword.
It's better to have JQuery elements in hand before the assertion so that you can use JQuery methods on them. cy.get() acts just like $(...) in JQuery, it will be enough to have the elements. (more here)
Once u have the elements, i.e. $el1 and $el2 below, then you can get their text via .text() method (more here) and then you can write your assertion.
Instead of a separate assertion, below I used a single one and checked if either of them includes the desired text by using || operator.
cy.get('first-el').then($el1 => {
cy.get('second-el').then($el2 => {
const inEl1 = $el1.text().includes('FIFA');
const inEl2 = $el2.text().includes('FIFA');
expect(inEl1 || inEl2).to.be.true;
});
});
var divfoo=document.getElementById("foo");
divfoo.className=" css-class css-class2 ";
divfoo.className=divfoo.className.replace(" css-class2 ", "");
The above code works. but I would like to make changes to last line of above code which is using replace method. Instead of writing the code like above, I would like to know why doesn't it work when written like below.
var divfoo=document.getElementById("foo");
divfoo.className=" css-class css-class2 ";
divfoo.className.replace(" css-class2 ", "");
Why should one assign to "divfoo.className" when applying replace method to the same "divfoo.className", why can't we just apply method directly like above code did?
Because of this should I hate javascript for not being logical?
enter code here
Element.className is a plain string representation of class HTML attribute.
String.replace method does not change the source string that is called on, just returns the result of replacement procedure.
If you want more "logical / functional" approach, look at Element.classList interface, namely the remove method.
I Guys
In forms I use,
onKeyUp="this.value = this.value.toUpperCase()"
To force upper-case. However for such as name fields. How do you force the upper letter to be upper-case only while the user is typing. I know INITCAP will do that but need to do as user is typing, if that makes sense.
Any help will be much appreciated.
This is a javascript question then, not and Oracle or APEX question. It shouldn't make any difference what the environment is as long as you have access to the DOM events with javascript functions. e.g. http://www.w3schools.com/jsref/event_onkeyup.asp
If you do a search there are lots of examples to Initcap a string in javascript, just pass in the string and reset the item in the dom e.g.
function capitalizeEachWord(str) {
return str.replace(/\w\S*/g, function(txt) {
return txt.charAt(0).toUpperCase() + txt.substr(1).toLowerCase();
});
}
I tried to solve this problem.
For that I created JavaScript function which check first letter capital ,if not then it display alert and revert text.
please check following code for text item:
function checkUpper()
{
var x = $x("P6_TEXT");
if (x.value.trim().substring(0,1) != x.value.trim().substring(0,1).toUpperCase()) {
alert ('First letter Must be in upper case');
x.value = x.value.trim().substring(0,x.value.trim().length-1).toString();
}
}
And set item P6_TEXT attribute as
onKeyUp="checkUpper();"
In the field custom attributes put this JS code:
onKeyUp="this.value = this.value.substring(0,1).toUpperCase()+this.value.substring(1).toLowerCase();"
You could use content modifiers from Universal Theme https://apex.oracle.com/pls/apex/apex_pm/r/ut/content-modifiers
I needed text in a page item to be uppercase and under Advanced I set the css classe to
u-textUpper
u-textInitCap - Sets The First Letter In Each Word To Use Uppercase
I've a FreeMarker library that I want to ship with my product, and I'm looking for a way to generate a HTML documentation for it based on the comments in the FTL file (in a Javadoc fashion).
For example, a typical function in my library is written like:
<#--
MyMacro: Does stuff with param1 and param2.
- param1: The first param, mandatory.
- param2: The second param, 42 if not specified.
-->
<#macro MyMacro param1 param2=42>
...
</#macro>
I didn't find anything on that subject, probably because there is no standard way of writing comments in FreeMarker (Such as #param or #returns in Javadoc).
I don't mind rolling my own solution for that, but I'm keen on using an existing system like Doxia (since I'm using Maven to build the project) or Doxygen maybe, instead of writing something from scratch.
Ideally I'd like to write the comment parsing code only, and rely on something else to detect the macros and generate the doc structure.
I'm open to changing the format of my comments if that helps.
In case you decide to write your own doc generator or to write a FTL-specific front-end for an existing document generator, you can reuse some of FreeMarker's parsing infrastructure:
You can use Template.getRootTreeNode() in order to retrieve the template's top level AST node. Because macros and the responding comments should be direct children of the this top level node (IIRC), iterating over its children and casting them to the right AST node subclass should give you almost everything you need with respect to FTL syntax. To illustrate the approach I hacked together a little "demo" (cfg is a normal FreeMarker Configuration object):
Template t = cfg.getTemplate("foo.ftl");
TemplateElement te = t.getRootTreeNode();
Enumeration e = te.children();
while(e.hasMoreElements()) {
Object child = e.nextElement();
if(child instanceof Comment) {
Comment comment = (Comment)child;
System.out.println("COMMENT: " + comment.getText());
} else if(child instanceof Macro) {
Macro macro = (Macro)child;
System.out.println("MACRO: " + macro.getName());
for(String argumentName : macro.getArgumentNames()) {
System.out.println("- PARAM: " + argumentName);
}
}
}
produces for your given example macro:
COMMENT:
MyMacro: Does stuff with param1 and param2.
- param1: The first param, mandatory.
- param2: The second param, 42 if not specified.
MACRO: MyMacro
- PARAM: param1
- PARAM: param2
How you parse the comment is then up to you ;-)
Update: Found something called ftldoc in my backups and uploaded it to GitHub. Maybe this is what you are looking for...
I am having a little bit of difficulty passing a variable into a selector in prototype. I would like to be able to pass a variable into the select string, so that one function can work for many of the same kind.
At the moment, this is what I would basically like to do:
function myFunct(var)
{
$(var + 'add_form').hide() //so inde the brackets would be ('#product1 #add_form') for example.
}
Be able to pass 'var' into the function that would pass it to the selector, so that I can hide a pattern that is the same for many on the page.
Any ideas for a path to follow would be greatly appreciated.
You're on the right track! Couple things:
var is a JavaScript keyword (source), don't use it to name a variable
if you're querying an element by id (such as #add_form) you don't need to add any container element as you're doing
If you're querying an element by class, you need to use the $$ function, not the $ function
You need to iterate over the wrapped set to call your method
whitespace is significant in css selectors, so make sure to include those in your selector construction to tell Prototype to search within your parent container:
function myFunct(parent) {
$$(parent + ' .add_form').invoke('hide')
}
myFunct('#someparent'); // hides .add_form inside #someparent
That should work... just rename var to something else.
function myFunct(yourVar)
{
$$('#' + yourVar + ' .add_form').each(function(s){ s.hide(); }); // yourVar being the id of the container element
}
I've put a '.' in front of add_form because you can't use multiple elements with same ID, make it a class.