In the jquery-jasmine documentation (I've listed the exact revision of the docs in case they change).
It describes:
toContainHtml(string)
expect($('<div><ul></ul><h1>header</h1></div>')).toContainHtml('<ul></ul>')
toHaveHtml(string)
expect($('<div><span></span></div>')).toHaveHtml('<span></span>')
When should I use toContainHtml() and when should I use toHaveHtml()? From the examples I can't tell the difference.
Judging by this ticket on jasmine-jquery's github page
toHaveHtml() is more exacting using a == check
Whereas toContainHtml() uses an indexOf() check.
However the example in the documentation doesn't really demonstrate this, so I'm still not certain.
Related
Using RSpec 3.7.0. I would like to know whether writing
expect(instance).not_to receive(:method)
is completely identical to writing
expect(instance).to receive(:method).never
or if there are any (even subtle) differences or side effects.
As per this link https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/issues/895
You can use either of these to cause an example to fail if a method is called
Author #myronmarston also provided an example
I'm not sure this question should be asked here, but I don't know where else, so I hope it is not banned. And if it is, please address me to a place where it should be asked.
I know in Laravel you can pass a variable called "Bar" to a view like this:
view()->withBar('Foo');
but I don't know how do I know, and the most important, where is it 'officially' explained.
I can find it in the __call function in the code (https://github.com/laravel/framework/blob/5.4/src/Illuminate/View/View.php) but not in the official API.
So, where is it officially explained?
This use to be documented but it has hasn't been included in the docs since 5.0 https://laravel.com/docs/5.0/views#passing-data-to-views.
As with most things with Laravel there are usually a few different ways to do the exact same thing so (for whatever reason) somethings do eventually get omitted from the docs but the functionality doesn't get removed. I would imagine this is because it might be considered a bad practice or not the best approach or even that Taylor may eventually want to remove it...who knows. Either way, there is usually an alternative given to achieve the same outcome.
Hope this helps!
Is there any good way to find where is a function being called in our codebase ?
There is a gem called Starscope (disclaimer: I am the author) which can list function calls in ruby code, among other things. It isn't perfect, since it can't handle crazy meta-programming, but it will find all the normal calls to a given function.
gem: https://rubygems.org/gems/starscope
github: https://github.com/eapache/starscope
user guide: https://github.com/eapache/starscope/blob/master/doc/USER_GUIDE.md
edit: Luc's answer is entirely accurate as far as it goes; I wrote Starscope specifically to be "Cscope for Ruby".
With ctags, no. It references functions declarations and definitions, not their uses.
Then it depends on the language.
cscope can help with C, but not with C++. With C++, you should have a look at clang based solutions : there is clang_indexer (and its many forks) (see vim-clang to integrate it in vim), but I did found a few quirks ; it seems YouCompleteMe does a few things related to code indexation (as it provides GotoImplementation/Declaration commands).
For other languages, you may have dedicated plugins. But for sure, there is always grep (and many plugins that integrates it)
(Mathematica version: 8.0.4)
lst = Names["Internal`*"];
Length[lst]
Pick[lst, StringMatchQ[lst, "*Bag*"]]
gives
293
{"Internal`Bag", "Internal`BagLength", "Internal`BagPart", "Internal`StuffBag"}
The Mathematica guidebook for programming By Michael Trott, page 494 says on the Internal context
"But similar to Experimental` context, no guarantee exists that the behavior and syntax of the functions will still be available in later versions of Mathematica"
Also, here is a mention of Bag functions:
Implementing a Quadtree in Mathematica
But since I've seen number of Mathematica experts here suggest Internal`Bag functions and use them themselves, I am assuming it would be sort of safe to use them in actual code? and if so, I have the following question:
Where can I find a more official description of these functions (the API, etc..) like one finds in documenation center? There is nothing now about them now
??Internal`Bag
Internal`Bag
Attributes[Internal`Bag]={Protected}
If I am to start using them, I find it hard to learn about new functions by just looking at some examples and trial and error to see what they do. I wonder if someone here might have a more complete and self contained document on the use of these, describe the API and such more than what is out there already or a link to such place.
The Internal context is exactly what its name says: Meant for internal use by Wolfram developers.
This means, among other things, the following things hold about anything you might find in there:
You most likely won't be able to find any official documentation on it, as it's not meant to be used by the public.
It's not necessarily as robust about invalid arguments. (Crashing the kernel can easily happen on some of them.)
The API may change without notice.
The function may disappear completely without notice.
Now, in practice some of them may be reasonably stable, but I would strongly advise you to steer away from them. Using undocumented APIs can easily leave you in for a lot of pain and a nasty surprise in the future.
I need a good reference for how to use standard Libraries in Ruby. Current libraries do not describe or give examples like say Java's. Yet this is where examples are much more needed (in Ruby), because I am not familiar with what the called method will yield! I am left with having to look at the source files every time, which seems inefficient. What is a good standard library reference... or am I just not understanding blocks yet?
I find myself bouncing around between the ruby core API on ruby-doc.org, googling for answers on random blogs, and spending time testing ideas in the interactive interpreter (irb). I haven't seen any other core reference documentation that I liked, but I do have a copy of The Ruby Way and its pretty decent.
Betweeen these four sources I can almost always find out how to solve the problem I'm working on.
Best of luck - ruby is fun, frustrating, and powerful.
There is the Ruby Standard Library documentation and sites like apidock. The Pickaxe book has a great reference towards the end. There's even a free version online, but it's quite out of date; to find the reference there, click Standard Library in the top-left frame.
Try GotAPI You'll be able to find the Ruby standard documentation and a whole lot of api docs there
Understanding blocks is pretty important, especially if you want to understand the Enumerable module. ruby-doc.org is usually all I need, but if I need a little more explanation I grab the PickAxe. You need the PickAxe, no question.
I am sorry , but again, i have to recommend ruby cookbook. (Already two times today)