Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PO
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>It's not a bad question. There are a few ways around having to totally trash your flow of control, however. Note: I didn't say it was pretty.</p> <p>Suppose you have objects A, B, C and D, <code>A.Amethod</code> doesn't return anything and calls a method <code>getBData</code> of B, B calls <code>getCData</code> method of C, and the issue is C was calling D something like so</p> <pre><code>var data = D.getRawData(); ... something to be done with data ... ... something else to be done with data... </code></pre> <p>and now it has to be written like</p> <pre><code>D.getData(function(data){ ... something to be done with data ... ... something else to be done with data... }); </code></pre> <p>well, you can always add a callback parameter to each of your methods, so that for the code the code that used to look like:</p> <pre><code> var A = { //I'm not recommending coding like this, just for demonstration purposes. ... Amethod: function(x,y,z){ var somethingForA = this.B.getBData(1,2,3); astatement1; astatement2; ... } ... } //end of A ... var B = { ... Bmethod: function(x,y,z){ var somethingForB = this.C.getCData(1,2,3); bstatement1; var somethingFromB = bstatement2; return somethingFromB; } ... } //end of B ... var C = { ... Cmethod: function(x,y,z){ var somethingForC = this.D.getRawData(1,2,3) cstatement1; var somethingFromC = cstatement2; return somethingFromC; } ... } //end of C ... </code></pre> <p>You'd now have:</p> <pre><code> var A = { ... Amethod: function(x,y,z){ this.B.getBData((1,2,3,function(somethingForA){ astatement1; astatement2; }); ... } ... } //end of A ... var B = { ... Bmethod: function(x,y,z,callback){ this.C.getCData(1,2,3,function(somethingForB){ bstatement1; var somethingFromB = bstatement2; callback(somethingFromB); }); ... } ... } //end of B ... var C = { ... Cmethod: function(x,y,z,callback){ this.D.getRawData(1,2,3,function(somethingForC) { cstatement1; var somethingFromC = cstatement2; callback(somethingFromC); }); } ... } //end of C ... </code></pre> <p>That's pretty much a straightforward refactoring using anonymous functions to implement all functionality keeping your flow of control. I don't know how literal a transform that would be; you might have to do some adjustment for variable scope. And obviously, it's not that pretty.</p> <p>Are there other ways? Sure. As you can see, the above is messy, and we'd hope to keep from writing messy code. How less messy depends upon context.</p> <p>You don't have to pass a callback parameter, any necessary callback could be passed to the objects beforehand, or it may be passed as one of the items <em>in</em> a parameter. The callback may not need to be directly invoked, but invoked indirectly using one of the various event handling methods available (which you'd have to look at what libraries you might want to use for that), and the data may be passed in when the event is triggered. Or maybe there's a global "DataGetter" that A can register a callback whenever data is "gotten" to completely avoid the intermediaries B and C. </p> <p>Finally, there's the consideration that if your are knee deep in invocations only to discover you need something that can only be obtained asynchronously, and that data has to be passed up the chain of command, you might be doing something a bit backwards in terms of which objects should control the flow of the program logic (I'm honestly stumped as to how to describe why I seem to think this scenario is problematic, though.). I tend to think, as instances of A have to contain instances of B, B contains instances of C, etc, the instances creating the sub-instances as part of its composition should have some degree of control as to how the sub-instances populate themselves, instead of letting the sub-instances fully decide.... if that makes sense :-(</p> <p>At this point I feel like I'm rambling a bit so... here's to hoping somebody would explain the issues better than me!</p>
    singulars
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. POAsynchrony poisoning -- I can't be the only sufferer
      singulars
      1. PTQuestion
    1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. USJayC
    plurals
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PO
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload