Code:
// Load default settings
let defaultSettings;
load("/assets/json/default-settings.json", 'json', function(defset) {
defaultSettings = defset;
// Create custom settings
if(!Object.keys(localStorage).includes('settings')) {
setLs('settings', JSON.stringify({}));
};
customiseSetting('Display/UI/Distance', 2)
});
function settingURL(url) {
return('children/' + url.split('/').join('/children/') + '/value');
}
function customiseSetting(url, value) {
url = settingURL(url);
// Split the string by '/' and use reduce to access the nested properties
const newSettings = url.split('/').reduce(function(accumulator, val, index, array) {
// If the object does not have the current component as a property, create an empty object for it
// If the current component is the last one, assign the value
if (index == array.length - 1) {
accumulator[val] = value;
} else if (!accumulator.hasOwnProperty(val)) {
accumulator[val] = {}; // update the accumulator object
}
log([accumulator, val, index, array])
// Return the updated object
return(accumulator);
}, JSON.parse(ls('settings')));
log(newSettings);
setLs('settings', JSON.stringify(newSettings));
}
I’ve been trying unsuccessfully for several days to fix to what must be a simple error. I’ve looked over it myself, but I can’t find the cause of the bug. I asked Bing, which usually helps, but it was unhelpful. So I’m sorry to be bothering you, but if you could help me solve this problem, I would really appreciate it.
EDIT: I fixed my code by using a recursive function as follows:
function customiseSetting(url, value) {
url = settingURL(url).split('/');
let newSettings;
function recursiveSet(object, list, index, setTo) {
// If the current component is the last one, assign the value
if(index == list.length - 1) {
object[list[index]] = setTo;
return(object);
} else {
// Check if it already contains the value
if(object.hasOwnProperty(list[index])) {
object[list[index]] = recursiveSet(object[list[index]], list, index + 1, setTo);
} else {
object[list[index]] = recursiveSet({}, list, index + 1, setTo);
}
return(object);
}
};
newSettings = recursiveSet(JSON.parse(ls('settings')), url, 0, value);
log(newSettings);
setLs('settings', JSON.stringify(newSettings));
}
You can use more debug outputs (log(…)) to narrow it down. Challenge your assumptions! If necessary, check line by line if all the variables still behave as expected. Or use a debugger if available/familiar.
This takes a few minutes tops and guarantees you to find at which line the actual behaviour diverts from your expectations. Then, you can make a more precise search. But usually the solution is obvious once you have found the precise cause.
The issue is that, in the function passed to reduce, you’re adding each object directly to the accumulator rather than to its intended parent. These are the problem lines:
if (index == array.length - 1) {
accumulator[val] = value;
} else if (!accumulator.hasOwnProperty(val)) {
accumulator[val] = {}; // update the accumulator object
}
There’s no pretty way (that I can think of at least) to do what you want using methods like reduce in vanilla JS, so I’d suggest using a for loop instead - especially if you’re new to programming. Something along these lines (not written to be actual code, just to give you an idea):
let curr = settings;
const split = url.split("/");
for (let i = 0; i < split.length: i++) {
const val = split[i];
if (i != split.length-1) {
//add a check to see if curr[val] exists
let next = {};
curr[val] = next;
curr = next;
}
//add else branch
}
It’s missing some things, but the important part is there - every time we move one level deeper in the URL, we update curr so that we keep our place instead of always adding to the top level.
I fixed my code by using a recursive function as follows:
function customiseSetting(url, value) {
url = settingURL(url).split('/');
let newSettings;
function recursiveSet(object, list, index, setTo) {
// If the current component is the last one, assign the value
if(index == list.length - 1) {
object[list[index]] = setTo;
return(object);
} else {
// Check if it already contains the value
if(object.hasOwnProperty(list[index])) {
object[list[index]] = recursiveSet(object[list[index]], list, index + 1, setTo);
} else {
object[list[index]] = recursiveSet({}, list, index + 1, setTo);
}
return(object);
}
};
newSettings = recursiveSet(JSON.parse(ls('settings')), url, 0, value);
log(newSettings);
setLs('settings', JSON.stringify(newSettings));
}
I’ve been trying unsuccessfully for several days to fix to what must be a simple error.
That really sucks. Others have already helped out so I won’t go there, but seriously do yourself a favour and start using large language models. I personally pay for ChatGPT Plus, but there are free ones (from other companies, not the free Open AI models) that could have helped you with this problem in minutes instead of days.
I’m an actual human. I don’t work for any AI company.
As a test I pasted OP’s broken code into an LLM and it took two seconds to find the problem, explain what the code actually does, explain what OP thinks the code should do, and write updated code that actually does that.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !programming@programming.dev
Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!
Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person’s post makes sense in another community cross post into it.
Hope you enjoy the instance!
Rules
Rules
Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you’re posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don’t want to watch videos
You can use more debug outputs (log(…)) to narrow it down. Challenge your assumptions! If necessary, check line by line if all the variables still behave as expected. Or use a debugger if available/familiar.
This takes a few minutes tops and guarantees you to find at which line the actual behaviour diverts from your expectations. Then, you can make a more precise search. But usually the solution is obvious once you have found the precise cause.
The issue is that, in the function passed to
reduce, you’re adding each object directly to the accumulator rather than to its intended parent. These are the problem lines:There’s no pretty way (that I can think of at least) to do what you want using methods like
reducein vanilla JS, so I’d suggest using a for loop instead - especially if you’re new to programming. Something along these lines (not written to be actual code, just to give you an idea):It’s missing some things, but the important part is there - every time we move one level deeper in the URL, we update
currso that we keep our place instead of always adding to the top level.I fixed my code by using a recursive function as follows:
What does i < mean in line 3 of your answer?
Lemmy’s code formatter has a bug where it escapes the less than symbol <
That really sucks. Others have already helped out so I won’t go there, but seriously do yourself a favour and start using large language models. I personally pay for ChatGPT Plus, but there are free ones (from other companies, not the free Open AI models) that could have helped you with this problem in minutes instead of days.
Like I said, I was using Bing. It’s usually helpful, but in this case it couldn’t help. Bing is based on GPT4 and is free
This advertisement brought to you by an LLM with a lemmy account… or, more depressingly, by a human that actually believes that.
I’m an actual human. I don’t work for any AI company.
As a test I pasted OP’s broken code into an LLM and it took two seconds to find the problem, explain what the code actually does, explain what OP thinks the code should do, and write updated code that actually does that.
Look at your settingURL function.
You always prepend a
children/to the URL. Then you split the incoming URL up into an array and concatenate the elements withchildren/.So it will become something like
children/Display/children/UI/Yes, that’s intentional. What’s not intentional is that they are all direct children of the parent object, rather than children of each other