Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Activity for Oleg Valter
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit | Post #289188 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How to solve the "ReferenceError: service is not defined"? Meaning If the script is using any of the advanced services, they must be enabled first. If the service is not enabled, it will not be added to the global scope (as a value of a global variable), resulting in an instance of `ReferenceError` being thrown (as the script is referencing a non-existent... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289187 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How to solve the "ReferenceError: service is not defined"? > Temporary notice: this is part of an ongoing project of transferring and splitting my canonical from Stack Overflow on common errors in Google Apps Script. As soon as the Q&As are finalized, it will be removed. Attempting to call a method of an advanced service can sometimes result in a Referenc... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289043 |
@#64656 well, I hope I am still in good standing there, so it shouldn't be a big deal. Otherwise, I can surely survive removal (that would actually be helpful) or voting (never had any issue with that). (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289154 |
Post edited: minor readability improvement |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289154 |
Post edited: reduced unnecessary verbosity |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289154 |
Post edited: removed outdated info on custom functions |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289154 |
Post edited: added info on the secondary reason for the error |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289154 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How to solve the "Cannot call from this context" error? Meaning This error happens on context mismatch and is specific to container-bound scripts. The reason for the error is attempting to call a method only available in one document type (usually, `getUi()` as its `Ui` class is shared between services) from a script bound to a document of other ty... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289153 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How to solve the "Cannot call from this context" error? > Temporary notice: this is part of an ongoing project of transferring and splitting my canonical from Stack Overflow on common errors in Google Apps Script. As soon as the Q&As are finalized, it will be removed. Oftentimes, when attempting to run a method on a built-in Google service from a stand... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289039 |
Unfortunately, that would not be a viable option for me (if one checks my name over on SO, they'll know why — I'd gladly expand it, but the character limit is rather strict there). I did opt for an alternative, though, which is to add the following to the profile info (with links):
> Due to the ac... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289043 |
Good point regarding linking back to the "original" content to keep readers in the know regarding the fact that both authors are one and the same. Also a good idea to link from the SO post back to this one (or these ones, should the conclusion be that it needs to be split, which seems to be the major... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289019 |
I quite like the idea of splitting — after all, the original arose from a set of circumstances unique to Stack Overflow (lots of duplicate Q&As [and we both know how problematic it is to link everything together there - in fact, there was a huge effort, and, I think, some of the users of our subcommu... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289021 |
No, I certainly do not dislike splitting the canonical into proper Q&As. In fact, that was (sort of) the plan after the original discussion, but, for various reasons, it never came to fruition. Given that Codidact lacks content in this niche, it might be the best way to proceed — after all, it would ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289019 |
Thankfully, this Q&A is 100% my original content — I double-checked whether anyone edited the question or any of the answers, and the answer is no (despite being made a wiki from the start, it being closed for half its lifecycle, the notice that it's under discussion, etc. contributed to that). (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289021 |
I highly suspect that I will not be able remove the content from SO to in the first place, yeah. I rarely delete content (2 times total across all the years spent on the network), so am a bit fuzzy on the rules even if I do know them. Hadn't bother to check initially, but have done so a couple of min... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289016 |
That's another idea I am entertaining — do you think it would be a good idea to try to get the best of both worlds and both split the reference into individual Q&A components and to add an article as a sort of entry point more focused on triage? (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #289016 |
Yeah, that's a viable option that I am considering, especially given that it'll pretty much fill the whole niche of content if done properly. Requiring more work is basically a non-issue for me, as I'll be more than happy to do that work should that be the direction to go. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289016 |
Post edited: Added a footnote on the suggestion to keep the original with a pointer to the updated content |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289016 |
Post edited: minor fix for the footnote ref |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #289016 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
To transfer, or not to, that is the question: whether 'tis nobler to let it stay or to take arms against Stack Overflow's dominance of FAQ canonicals Some of you may know me from Stack Overflow or the broader network. In light of recent actions by the company, I finally decided to move over to Codidact. I am a subject matter expert on Google Apps Script (among other fields) and would like to move my canonical on extremely common errors developers ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |