Given:
A class named B.
2 persistent records of class B, id = {"B1", "B2"}.
A class named A:
class A Extends %Persistent
{
Property rB As B;
ForeignKey FKB(rB) References B();
}
An instance of class A, named objA, with objA.rB = "B3" (which is an invalid value because B has no "B3" persistent record)
I want that:
When objA is going to be saved (objA.%Save()), substitute with an empty string the rB invalid value and save it.
So far:
I have tried to make the substitution using callback methods ( %OnBeforeSave), but it seems that %ValidateObject is being called before.
Is there a way of doing value changes before %ValidateObject using callback methods?
Thanks in advance.
You can modify objects in callback method %OnAddToSaveSet:
http://docs.intersystems.com/cache201511/csp/docbook/DocBook.UI.Page.cls?KEY=GOBJ_callbacks#GOBJ_cb_onaddtosaveset
Related
I changed my code from this
object SomeHelper{}
to this
#Component
class SomeHelper{}
In my test class I wrote something like this:
class SomeHelperTester{
val cut = SomeHelper
//...
}
which used to work fine when SomeHelper was an object, but now the line val cut = SomeHelper is underlined with an error saying Classifier SomeHelper does not have a companion object, and thus must be initialized. How can I make this line of code work?
just add () behind it, like
val cut = SomeHelper()
This is down to the difference between an object (a singleton, with exactly one instance), and a class (of which you can create as many instances as you like).
When you declare a variable with an initialiser (as you do with cut), the initialiser needs to evaluate to an object. When SomeHelper was declared as an object, then it evaluates to the one and only instance, which works fine as an initialiser. But when it's declared as a class, then the class name alone doesn't mean anything.
What you need to do is to create an instance of the class, by calling its constructor. In this case, since you haven't specified a constructor, you get the default one which takes no parameters. So you can simply call it by appending an empty pair of brackets, and use that as the initialiser:
val cut = SomeHelper()
I'm having trouble adding elements to an object that keeps a collection of generic-typed values. I tried a Minimal Working Example that causes the error:
class OneElementQueue {
type eltType;
var elements : [0..0] eltType;
//initializer
proc init(type eltType) {
this.eltType = eltType;
}
proc add(element : eltType) {
this.elements[0] = element;
}
proc remove() : eltType {
return this.elements[0];
}
} //end of OneElementQueue
class Monkey {
var name: string;
var age: int;
proc init(name : string, age : int) {
this.name = name;
this.age = age;
}
} //end of class Monkey
var q = new owned OneElementQueue(Monkey);
var m = new owned Monkey("Kyle", 6);
q.add(m);
When I try to compile all of this, I get an error:
$ chpl BadQueue.chpl
BadQueue.chpl:12: In function 'add':
BadQueue.chpl:13: error: Scoped variable would outlive the value it is set to
BadQueue.chpl:12: note: consider scope of element
$
What is the correct way to go about adding something to a generic data structure like this? How am I going about this the wrong way?
There are two possible approaches you can take here, depending on what behavior you want:
"I want to have my collection take ownership of the Monkey objects"
In this case, you'll want to instantiate your OneElementQueue collection to store owned Monkey objects rather than simply [borrowed] Monkey objects, which is the default for class types. You can do this with the one line change (Try it Online):
var q = new owned OneElementQueue(owned Monkey);
In this approach, passing an owned Monkey to your add() method will pass the ownership to the argument and eventually to the collection, making the original object reference invalid (nil).
"I want to have my collection borrow the existing Monkey objects without taking ownership of them"
In this case, you'll need to tell the add() method that the argument passed into it will outlive the argument itself (and then be sure not to lie about it). In Chapel version 1.19, this can be done via lifetime annotations:
proc add(element : eltType) lifetime element > this {
where the annotation lifetime element > this asserts that the actual argument passed through element will outlive the this collection itself, so the compiler should not fear that the borrow will cease to exist once the formal argument has.
Lifetime annotations were not available in Chapel 1.18, so if you're using that version you need to use a slightly bigger hammer and apply pragma "unsafe" to the method. Note that pragmas are not an officially supported feature and may change in the future, so for this case, served as a stopgap until lifetime annotations had been implemented (Try it Online):
pragma "unsafe"
proc add(element : eltType) {
I'm trying to see if there's a way to get a refference of an object which is outside the local (and global) scope, but who exists in memory.
Let's say in my program, i've instantiated an object whose reference is this:
{O:9*\PROGRAM=ZAVG_DELETE_THIS\CLASS=LCL_SMTH}
Far away after tons of calls, in a context where i wouldn't be able to access this object, could i do something like getting the reference of this object simply by knowing the above string?
I was looking into the cl_abap_*descr classes, but i haven't found a method that takes the 'program_name', 'class_name' and 'instance_number', to return the reference of an object.
I'm trying to do this for the purpose of debugging, not to build something that works.
[EDIT 1]:
I assumed that the o:9 string was required in order to get the reference of the object. As pointed out in the response of #mydoghasworms, this isn't the case. It seems that i only need the local name of the variable which holds the reference.
I hope I understand your question correctly, because I am not sure what you mean with "for the purpose of debugging", but here goes:
You can access the variables of another program that are loaded in the memory of the same session (I am pretty sure it does not need to be in the call stack) using:
ASSIGN ('(PROGRAM)VARIABLE') TO LV_LOCAL.
With reference variables, it becomes a bit more tricky, but here is an example that will help to demonstrate.
Here is our calling program that contains a reference variable LR_TEST which we want to access somewhere else. For the purpose of the demonstration, I make reference to a locally defined class (because that's what I gather from your question).
REPORT ZCALLER.
class lcl_test definition.
public section.
data: myval type i.
methods: my_meth exporting e_val type i.
endclass.
data: lr_test type ref to lcl_test.
CREATE OBJECT lr_test.
lr_test->MYVAL = 22.
perform call_me(zcallee).
class lcl_test implementation.
method my_meth.
* Export the attribute myval as param e_val.
e_val = myval.
endmethod.
endclass.
Here is the program in which we want to access a variable from the above program.
REPORT ZCALLEE.
form call_me.
field-symbols: <ref>.
data: ld_test type ref to object.
data: lv_val type i.
* Exhibit A: Gettinf a reference to a 'foreign' object instance
assign ('(ZCALLER)LR_TEST') to <ref>.
* <ref> now contains a reference to the class instance from the program
* ZCALLER (not very useful, except for passing around maybe)
* Exhibit B: Getting a public attribute from a 'foreign' class instance
assign ('(ZCALLER)LR_TEST->MYVAL') to <ref>.
* <ref> now contains the value of the attribute MYVAL
* Exhibit C: Getting a reference to an instance and calling a method
assign ('(ZCALLER)LR_TEST') to <ref>. "Again the class reference
if sy-subrc = 0. "Rule: Always check sy-subrc after assign before
"accessing a field symbol! (but you know that)
ld_test = <ref>. "Now we have a concrete handle
* Now we make a dynamic method call using our instance handle
CALL METHOD ld_test->('MY_METH')
IMPORTING
e_val = lv_val.
endif.
endform.
I'm new to the bimap functionality of the Boost libraries, and I'm having trouble passing a bimap into another function. My bimap looks like this:
typedef boost::bimap< int, int > bimap_type;
bimap_type bm;
I have an add_values() function that adds a set of values to the bimap:
add_values(int a, int b)
{
bm.insert(bimap_type::value_type(a, b));
}
I then have a function that is meant to set the values of the bimap by getting them from a Singleton Class:
void set_values()
{
MyClass::instance()->get_values(bm);
}
And, in MyClass, get_values() looks like this:
void get_values(bimap_type myBimap)
{
myBimap.add_values(3, 5);
}
However, MyClass does not recognise 'bimap_type'. I try putting the typedef in a separate header file and including that in MyClass, but I get the error message:
'class bimap_type' has no member named 'add_values'
How can I successfully pass the bimap to this Singleton Class in order to fill it with values from the Class? Does anyone know?
Thanks a lot.
Er, boost::bimap itself doesn't have an add_values method and it's hard to tell from these code fragments why you're suddenly expecting one to appear.
Consider renaming your functions: set_values() that calls get_values() that calls add_values() is one confusing call chain...
When you need to modify an object in a function, you have to take it by reference (or a pointer). The idea is that you must work with the same object inside and outside of the function. If you pass by value, function will see a copy, so anything it does with it does not reflect on original object.
// formerly known as add_values()
void initialize(bimap_type& bm, int a, int b)
{
bm.insert(bimap_type::value_type(a, b));
}
And this is how you will call it:
initialize(myBitmap, 3, 5);
Make sure to update your whole call chain to pass by reference where appropriate, because currently your get_values() works with a copy too.
I've been practicing some Ruby meta-programming recently, and was wondering about assigning anonymous classes to constants.
In Ruby, it is possible to create an anonymous class as follows:
anonymous_class = Class.new # => #<Class:0x007f9c5afb21d0>
New instances of this class can be created:
an_instance = anonymous_class.new # => #<#<Class:0x007f9c5afb21d0>:0x007f9c5afb0330>
Now, when the anonymous class is assigned to a constant, the class now has a proper name:
Foo = anonymous_class # => Foo
And the previously created instance is now also an instance of that class:
an_instance # => #<Foo:0x007f9c5afb0330>
My question: Is there a hook method for the moment when an anonymous class is assigned to a constant?
There are many hooks methods in Ruby, but I couldn't find this one.
Let's take a look at how constant assignment works internally. The code that follows is extracted from a source tarball of ruby-1.9.3-p0. First we look at the definition of the VM instruction setconstant (which is used to assign constants):
# /insns.def, line 239
DEFINE_INSN
setconstant
(ID id)
(VALUE val, VALUE cbase)
()
{
vm_check_if_namespace(cbase);
rb_const_set(cbase, id, val);
INC_VM_STATE_VERSION();
}
No chance to place a hook in vm_check_if_namespace or INC_VM_STATE_VERSION here. So we look at rb_const_set (variable.c:1886), the function that is called everytime a constant is assigned:
# /variable.c, line 1886
void
rb_const_set(VALUE klass, ID id, VALUE val)
{
rb_const_entry_t *ce;
VALUE visibility = CONST_PUBLIC;
# ...
check_before_mod_set(klass, id, val, "constant");
if (!RCLASS_CONST_TBL(klass)) {
RCLASS_CONST_TBL(klass) = st_init_numtable();
}
else {
# [snip], won't be called on first assignment
}
rb_vm_change_state();
ce = ALLOC(rb_const_entry_t);
ce->flag = (rb_const_flag_t)visibility;
ce->value = val;
st_insert(RCLASS_CONST_TBL(klass), (st_data_t)id, (st_data_t)ce);
}
I removed all the code that was not even called the first time a constant was assigned inside a module. I then looked into all the functions called by this one and didn't find a single point where we could place a hook from Ruby code. This means the hard truth is, unless I missed something, that there is no way to hook a constant assignment (at least in MRI).
Update
To clarify: The anonymous class does not magically get a new name as soon as it is assigned (as noted correctly in Andrew's answer). Rather, the constant name along with the object ID of the class is stored in Ruby's internal constant lookup table. If, after that, the name of the class is requested, it can now be resolved to a proper name (and not just Class:0xXXXXXXXX...).
So the best you can do to react to this assignment is to check the name of the class in a loop of a background worker thread until it is non-nil (which is a huge waste of resources, IMHO).
Anonymous classes don't actually get their name when they're assigned to a constant. They actually get it when they're next asked what their name is.
I'll try to find a reference for this. Edit: Can't find one, sorry.