There is a model like this
{
name,
budget
}
And there is a role reviewer
Is there any way to hide the budget field for the reviewers?
You can use a remote hook for that model. For example your code could look like this:
MyModel.afterRemote('**', function(ctx, modelInstance, next) {
if (ctx.result) {
if (checkIfUserHasRole('reviewer')) { // <-- you need to implement this function
// if you are going to return a list of items, eg. from Model.find(...)
if (Array.isArray(modelInstance)) {
ctx.result = ctx.result.map(item => {
return modifyYourProperties(item); // <-- you need to implement this function
}
}
// if you are going to return a single item, eg. from Model.findById(...)
else {
ctx.result = modifyYourProperties(ctx.result); // <-- as above...
}
});
}
}
next();
}
So now, on every remote call to your model, you can modify the results. They are already processed but not yet returned to the requester, so here is where you can hide desired properties.
Of course, you need to implement methods checkIfUserHasRole and modifyYourProperties to do what you are going to achieve. You can read more about remote hooks here: https://loopback.io/doc/en/lb3/Remote-hooks.html
Related
So, I have come across a solution for this problem using Get_storage thanks to a couple of great explanations about the topic. I managed to work with getx and the Provider package to save data when adding new stuff and reading it when starting the application (thats the behavior i'm going for here). Said that, i'm having a hard time trying to remove data from memory.
Context
The project is a to-do list app, the front end is working perfectly, but when it comes to storage it gets more complicated. The thing is that i'm very new to flutter and mobile development, i recieved some help but this kind of stuff is still foggy in my brain, i could not remove data using the same logic. When i called box.Remove('key') like the docs say, my ENTIRE list got removed. I don't have a single clue why that happaned.
And so i wonder if i could understand it more by reading through some more explanations, i know Shared Preferences is a great deal do work with this kind of situation, but i would also be confortable with a solution using get_storage since i'm more familiar with it.
the code:\
I'm calling these lists inside a listView on a different file with the help of Provider - -
List<Task> _tasks = [
Task(
name: "Title",
description: "Description",
),
];
Adding tasks to my ListView - -
void add(String newTitle, newDesc) {
final task = Task(name: newTitle, description: newDesc);
_tasks.add(task);
notifyListeners();
}
Here is the removal of a task from the ListView - -
void removeTasks(Task task) {
_tasks.remove(task);
notifyListeners();
}
I tried to implement a logic to write and read data, it worked. But i also tried to use this removeTasks method to remove from storage as well by calling box.Remove('tasks'); ('tasks' was the key passed to the writing and reading methods). It removed everything from memory since my listview got empty.
Since i'm not that experienced, i went through the documentation and could understand some of the SharedPreferences Explanation (same with got_storage) but i'm having a hard time when trying to apply it to my code.
I would appreciate any help using get_storage OR shared preferences to this problem.
Where i'm calling the deletion:
// bool variables that control the state of the screen
// since i can change it to show done tasks or on goind tasks
// dont mind that, i think its irrelevant to the problem.
//
bool isActiveDoing = true;
bool isActiveDone = false;
List finalArray = []; //it will store the tasks
class TaskList extends StatefulWidget {
#override
_TaskListState createState() => _TaskListState();
}
class _TaskListState extends State<TaskList> {
#override
Widget build(BuildContext context) {
//dont mind the if else as well, its not part of the problem
//just using it to handle the state of the screen
if (isActiveDoing) {
finalArray = Provider.of<TasksFunctions>(context).tasks;
}
//TasksFunctions is a class with methods on regards to the storage
//it contains add tasks, remove, etc... i'm using provider to
//link those to the screens with the notifyListeners
if (isActiveDone) {
finalArray = Provider.of<TasksFunctions>(context).doneTasks;
}
//now here is where i call the class tha has the deletion method
return Consumer<TasksFunctions>(
builder: (context, tasksFunctions, child) {
return ListView.builder(
//list view tha has all the tasks
itemCount: finalArray.length,
itemBuilder: (context, index) {
final task = finalArray[index];
//using the slidableWidget to wrap the deletion method
return SlidableWidget(
onDismissed: (action) {
if (isActiveDoing) {
Provider.of<TasksFunctions>(context, listen: false)
.removeTask(task);
//so here is where i'm deleting those tasks, calling that method
//listed up on this post
}
if (isActiveDone {
Provider.of<TasksFunctions>(context, listen: false)
.removeDone(task);
}
},
);
},
);
},
);
}
}
So i spent some time translating the code, but i think that it does not match any of flutter's good practices principles.
I also tried calling storageList.remove(task); and then rewriting it with the box.write('tasks', storageList); but nothing was removed from the memory (maybe because i didn't loop through the whole storageLists searching for the right index i guess)
Sounds like your code is based on my answer to your original question about this.
If that's the case, then the key tasks is the key to the entire list of maps, not a single map or Task. So it's behaving as expected when it wipes all of your tasks.
In order to persist any changes, you'd have to remove that particular map (Task) from storageList then overwrite the box again with box.write('tasks', storageList); It will save over the same list of maps and persist any deletions you made.
If you share your code where you're trying to delete the task and whats going on around it I can give you a more specific example.
EDIT: Answering question in comments.
If you wanted to go the UniqueKey route you wouldn't need the index at all. You could do something like this.
class Task {
final String name;
final String description;
final String key; // not an actual Key but will take the String value of a UniqueKey
Task({this.key, this.name, this.description});
}
When you add a new Task it would look like this.
final task = Task(
description: 'test description',
name: 'test name',
key: UniqueKey().toString());
Then you could use a Map of maps instead of a list of maps and use the key for both.
Map storageList = {};
void addAndStoreTask(Task task) {
_tasks.add(task);
final Map storageMap = {}; // temporary map that gets added to storage
storageMap['name'] = task.name;
storageMap['description'] = task.description;
storageMap['key'] = task.key;
storageList[task.key] = storageMap; // adding temp map to storageList
box.write('tasks', storageList); // adding map of maps to storage
}
Then your restore function would look like this:
void restoreTasks() {
storageList = box.read('tasks'); // initializing list from storage
storageList.forEach((key, value) { // value here is each individual map that was stored
final task =
Task(name: value['name'], description: value['description'], key: key);
_tasks.add(task);
});
}
Then when you go to delete, you iterate through the list and find the matching key.
I need to Delete All the records in a list applet by a button clicked method. In order to achieve this, I have added a button to the list applet with "DeleteAllRecords" method and added a script to BC PreInvokeMethod function as below. Once clicked on the button all the records will get deleted, but the applet won't get refreshed. How Can I achieve that?
try
{
if(MethodName == "DeleteAllRecords")
{
var EmpBO = TheApplication().GetBusObject("XXXX");
var EmpBC = EmpBO.GetBusComp("XXXX");
with(EmpBC)
{
SetViewMode(AllView);
ActivateField("EmployeeID");
ClearToQuery();
SetSearchExpr("[XXXX] <> ' '");
ExecuteQuery(ForwardOnly);
var Frecord = FirstRecord();
while(Frecord)
{
Frecord = DeleteRecord();
Frecord = FirstRecord();
}
}
//BC.InvokeMethod("RefreshBuscomp");
return (CancelOperation);
}
}
catch(e)
{
throw(e);
}
finally
{
EmpBO = null;
EmpBC = null;
}
return (ContinueOperation);
You could try a few things.
1: A simple null query in the end after all deletions are done. ClearToQuery() and ExecuteQuery();
2: There is a BC method for RefreshBusComp (check documentation) which can be used with InvokeMethod(). Does pretty much the same thing as 1. I see you already tried it and probably did not work.
3: There are Business services which can refresh applets , like FINS Teller UI navigation.
4: You could also try a null query in browserscript/javascript, put that in InvokeMethod, so that it runs after the BC escript. Genb has to be run to generate bscripts.
One of these should work .
I have got one listview in qml now known as listview1. For each element in listview1, it contains another listview used to show some of its variables. Now I want to make it possible for all such sub-listviews able to add items to them. And also adding item to one of them will not affect all the other listviews in other elements of listview1.
What is the best way to solve such problem? Thanks
Adapted from https://stackoverflow.com/a/55604525/1493608 (same thing but with a GridView instead of a ListView) :
Give each sub-ListView a UUID.
Connect each sub-ListView to a listview1 signal that you will use to broadcast to sub-ListView delegates what you will want to do.
In this signal, put your UUID.
In sub-ListView receivers, put a filter on the UUID and do what you want to do only if it is the right one.
ListView {
id: listview1
signal broadcaster(string uuid, var other_args)
delegate: ListView {
// Provided like this or as a role from the corresponding list element
property string uuid: ""
signal sendToOtherLV(string uuid, var other_args)
function lv_receiver(broadcasted_uuid, other_args) {
if (this.uuid === broadcasted_uuid) {
// Do what you have to do with other_args.
}
}
Component.onCompleted: {
/*
* Custom way to generate the UUID and store it so
* the other ListViews will be able to retrieve it.
*/
this.uuid = generateAndStoreUUID()
// Connecting the sub-ListView to your "sub-ListView LAN".
this.sendToOtherLV.connect(listview1.broadcaster)
listview1.broadcaster.connect(this.lv_receiver)
}
Component.onDestruction: {
// Disconnecting the sub-ListView from your "sub-ListView LAN".
this.sendToOtherLV.disconnect(listview1.broadcaster)
listview1.broadcaster.disconnect(this.lv_receiver)
}
// Here is an example of what you might have to do
function foo() {
// ...
var otherlv_receiver_uuid
var signal_args
// Retreive the UUID of the ListView that you want to send something to.
// Set the other arguments you want to send through the signal.
this.sendToOtherLV(otherlv_receiver_uuid, signal_args)
// ...
}
// Other sub-ListView-related stuff
}
// Other listview1-related stuff
}
I've got a view and a map function, in CouchDB. I'm simply iterating over some values in an array, an emitting them individually. I'd like to exclude a property of the documents that I am emitting, though. I was hoping to just call delete on it, but that doesn't appear to be doing anything. The value is still emitted with the property. Is this a limitation in order to keep indexing fast? My map function looks like this:
function(doc) {
if (doc.type == 'user' && doc.spaces) {
doc.spaces.forEach(function (space) {
if (space.tokens) {
space.tokens.forEach(function (token) {
emit(token.token, space);
});
}
});
}
}
Where I emit space, I'd like to delete the tokens property of it, before emitting. I don't want to expose other tokens in this data. So, I modified to code to look like this, with no luck. It still emits the full document, with tokens intact:
function(doc) {
if (doc.type == 'user' && doc.spaces) {
doc.spaces.forEach(function (space) {
if (space.tokens) {
var tokens = space.tokens;
delete space.tokens;
tokens.forEach(function (token) {
emit(token.token, space);
});
}
});
}
}
It happened the same trouble for me, now. And I was search the topic. But unfortunately, the other answer was not useful for me. Because, CouchDB is not SQL, documents has a different properties. Therefore I cannot emit with a specific properties.
After thinking, I hit on an idea for the problem. It is there:
function( doc )
{
// Remove a `seal` in the doc using a deep-copy technique.
var tmp = JSON.parse( JSON.stringify( doc ) );
// We can `delete` a property as we like!
delete tmp._rev;
// Emit `tmp`.
emit( null, tmp );
}
We've been bitten by this problem as well.
We worked around it by creating a new object and emitting that instead:
emit(token.token, {
name : space.name,
id : space.id
etc : etc
}
We found that was the best way anyway as most of the time there was no need to emit complete (child) documents and only what was required.
I couldn't find a way to pass arguments when using Ember's Custom Events which I found here.
I prefer avoiding solutions which target "parent" views specifically, such as this one since we lose the "bubbling".
My Usage is as following
plugins.js
Em.Object.reopen({
triggerEvent: function (eventName) {
this.$().trigger(eventName, this);
}
});
MyView.js
click: function () {
this.triggerEvent('stepClicked');
}
The code in Ember (0.96+) shows that passing an additional params is considered a manager, which isn't passed on
rootElement.delegate('.ember-view', event + '.ember', function(evt, triggeringManager) {
...
if (manager && manager !== triggeringManager) {
result = self._dispatchEvent(manager, evt, eventName, view);
} else if (view) {
result = self._bubbleEvent(view,evt,eventName);
}
Super thanks in advance,
Oren Rubin
You can pass an event object which will tell you what element is being clicked on:
click: function(event){
// will be called when when an instance's
// rendered element is clicked
console.log("element clicked: " + this.get('elementId') );
return false; // return true if you want the click event to bubble up to parent view (default it true)
}
I think an even better way would be to use {{action}} in your template. Take a look at this answer for an example.