Working on a large existing Angular project, I discovered that modifying the JSON files containing translations had no effect on the project. I infer that it is getting them from a server. Generally speaking, how do I disable this?
The project involves Typescript and Ionic, and I'm using a pipe to translate within the HTML.
What happened in my case was, In case of offline/server down state, default language to translation service was not set, as soon as I set it to 'en_us' default, even in offline case translation is working :)
Something like
if(!navigator.isOnline) {
this.translate.setDefaultLang('en_us');
}
this is all I did. Hope it helps someone. I did this in my Ionic 5 project.
Related
I'm total newbie with Laravel, so the question might not be the most intelligent, be gentle, please.
I'd like to use an Open Source application made with Laravel. However, the application does not fully suit my needs, hence some customization is needed.
Naturally, I don't what to change the application files and also want to keep all my files separated.
In other PHP-based applications there are typically methods to customise the app without touching any other code. Also, it is possible to have own code nicely in one place. For instance, Wordpress has a theme concept, child theme concept, plugins and hooks in code (filters and actions). In Magento we have a simple method of overriding a core file by copying it to local code pool, as well as a more sophisticated dependency injection, which allows to override any class anywhere.
I've been trying to understand what is the correct way to customise a Laravel application in such a way, that my own modifications are separated from the base application and e.g. updating the base is possible.
Please guide me, or give pointers on how to do this.
Sounds like Packages might be your best option.
https://laravel.com/docs/master/packages
They let you customize very much in your application without touching other parts of the code, as well as keeping it separated from the other parts of the application.
Here's a getting started guide on packages:
https://medium.com/#lasselehtinen/getting-started-on-laravel-package-development-a62110c58ba1
JavaScript newbie here. I'm new to Angular2 and am currently learning about things like module-loaders (there's so many!), etc, so bear with me since my space of "unknown unknowns" is probably quite large.
I'm interested in creating a JavaScript based "Packaged Web App" for windows ("Packaged" in the sense that the JS is included in the Universal Windows Platform app).
One constraint to keep in mind is that I have severe limitations on the size of my packaged app. The smaller, the better.
With that in mind, I have a few specific questions that will hopefully expose the extent of my ignorance:
Without resorting to Electron or Ionic2, is it possible (also, is it a good idea) to create the offline experience in Angular2 and then only manually include the resulting transpiled .js files in my Visual Studio project?
How hard is it to manage the dependencies for these transpiled files? Are they entirely self contained?
Roughly how large would the minimum set of manually imported files end up being? When I use NPM to install angular2, it winds up being ~80mb - a large portion of this (most?) looks like dev tools, test infrastructure, etc. What's the minimal set of angular dependencies needed for the client app to work?
Thanks!
Without resorting to Electron or Ionic2, is it possible (also, is it a good idea) to create the offline experience in Angular2 and then only manually include the resulting transpiled .js files in my Visual Studio project?
Yes, it is possible. TypeScript will be compiled to javascript codes, which will be consumed by your project. So eventually, it is compiled js codes that will be necessary for your project.
But, if you are so worried about your project's size, then I suggest you using Angular 1, which is only JS codes. And for the minimum size of Angular 1 and its dependency jquery. There is a compressed version of Angular 1 (angular.min.js: 164kb) and jquery(jquery-3.1.1.min.js: 85kb).
Answering my own question here:
Yes, it's possible. You can copy over the transpiled .js files and then simply point the webview control at the generated index.html. With that being said, it's a pretty kludgy dev experience since you're constantly working around VS.
The dependencies are handled for you - it's all in the minified/uglified js files.
I haven't investigated tree-shaking yet, but it looks like I can get away with ~0.5Mb with a skeleton project.
After updating with Xcode 6.3, I found something strange things with my projects.
Below codes causes parse issue that says "Could not build module 'AgendaFramework'", the AgendaFramework is my custom embedded framework for ios8:
#import MyEmbededFramework;
The error marker looks like this:
The issues is raised during indexing not building. Whole building can be performed successfully without any error or warning. I can build, archive, run on device, deploy, submit to App Store.
However the error marker shows up when I edit the classes that belongs to the extension. The the extension(widget) explicitly linked to the embedded framework. (I know that I don't have to do it when I use #import statement.)
In this state, I could not receive any valid content assistant, very annoying.
After I replace the import statement with old style, the problem was disappeared:
#import <AgendaFramework/AgendaFramework.h>
I have several other projects that have very similar topology with the project which causes this issue, But they are okay. Only one project causes this issue. I compared every detail build settings, I could not find any clue.
I tried:
Delete derived data
Full Clean
Reboot
Any clues are welcomed. Thanks!
It looks like turning on:
Allow Non-modular Includes In Framework Modules solved this issue for me.
Hi this is due to the fact that file which you are making it public in framework header must be public also.
Sometimes this issue can be solved by adding the framework to the same folder as the .xcodeproj file, no subfolders or anything.
Credits to Jonny who points it out as a comment in the question.
Solution that worked for me: diligence in framework header file orientation to system style imports... like #import <CoreXLib/CoreThreads.h> the story:
In my case my framework that I built came from the combination of several code bases as it became apparent that I could reuse some of the general design patterns across that code easer via Framework vs the fragile Xcode project pathnames.
As I built my framework "CoreXLib", I reorganized it into the Cocoa Framework typical of Xcode. I changed my imports from:
#import "CoreTypeAliases.h" // project local style
to
#import <CoreXLib/CoreTypeAliases.h> // system or framework style
appropriately. Several projects that used the CoreXLib.framework which includes the public headers in the lego-folder worked... so I thought I was good to go...
Unfortunately some of the headers that were public did not get fully updated. The classes in the framework built just fine in the local style. All projects using it worked up to this point and then I ran into one that didn't... and the error noted by #jeeeyul
So after finding this thread and finding #kwz 's solution, and not having it do anything in my case, I decided to polish the code up while I was trying to figure this problem out. In the polishing, I found that some of the #imports did not get changed like they should have in the Xcode search and replaces. Time for some hand-jamming...
After fixing all of those references in all of my CoreXLib project headers (not just the public ones, self defense), I dove back into the problem... I took the newly complied CoreXLib.framework over to the errant project that embedded it... and the problem had vanished! I checked the Allow Non-modular Includes... in both the framework project and the project that linked the framework in and both were "No". Flipping both to "Yes" and to "No" made no difference in several tests. The only other change was the #import "..." to #import <CoreXLib/...> modifications.
So sometimes polishing the apple 🍎 knocks the bugs🐞🐞off...
set YES in Build Active Architecture Only in build settings.
It worked for me.
Today I solved this problem by those steps,:
Chose the schema "MyEmbededFramework"
Press [Command + B] to build
From the build phase panel, add "MyEmbededFramework.framework" to Link Binary With Libraries
Try to build your project, the problem may disappear now.
you can try this, it's work for me. delete DerivedData dir that about your project.step by step
Turn off module's in build settings. That may work
We're using octo.exe to create releases. It starts suddenly giving error saying can't find project. I checked the api/projects and that's true, it is not in the returned json response. But when I look at the dashboard I can see the project. The only thing I did was cloning another project from this one earlier. The cloned project is working fine but not the original project.
It exists in dashboard (web gui) but not in api (hence octa.exe can't find project)
Looks like api is caching the projects. The new projects that I created via GUI not available in api.
Thanks,
I have had the same issue yesterday. It turns out to be something interesting. I believe that your project is still there properly set, but the total number of projects that you have become more than the listed ones in the API, and that's why the Octo.exe couldn't see it anymore.
I have explained here, how I managed to fix that issue quickly.
This is due to how pagination is implemented in Octopus (pretty poorly if you ask me). But you can override it. add this to the URL (at the end).
'?skip=0&take=2147483647'
alternatively, you can watch the json returned, if you find the links.Page.Next property you can use that link to get next page of the api response.
I am trying to get started in development of my website and plugins using Umbraco. When I download the binaries from Codeplex, the installation and running of the website works fine. When I downloaded the source code, All I get is a login screen even when the web.config files are the same. Am I doing something wrong or is there something I missed.
The path I use to map IIS to is
branches\4.1.0\umbraco\presentation
You need to compile the source code to get it to work.
To be honest, you shouldn't need the full source unless you really want to start hacking around in the core (which may cause you problems with future updates) or you want to see how stuff works. The Umbraco framework is pretty extensible, I've not found too much so far that I couldn't do without having to touch the core source.
I had a similar issue when running the source and that was that the hashing of the admin password did not work. So i debugged it to see what value was expected and then changed it in the database.