I like the idea of specific argument types instead of "string" in a method. So I have a method like
public async Task<Result<T>> GetDataAsync<T>(Url url)
A test would look like this
[Test]
public void AllEntitiesCalledInBootUp()
{
_substitute.Received(1).GetDataAsync(new Url("https://www.gogol.com:1234/v1/entities/all"))
}
with a string it would work. With a "new" it won't.
How can I check whether a call was received?
Related
I am working with Spring AOP to define a common fallback method instead of duplicating code.
I used #Around as I have to return the object from Aspect.I am trying to decide #Around advice depending on the response returned,but not able to do so.
Here is my controller:
#RequestMapping(value = "/add/employee", method = RequestMethod.GET)
public EmployeeResponse addEmployee(#RequestParam("name") String name, #RequestParam("empId") String empId) {
EmployeeResponse employeeResponse=employeeService.createEmployee(name, empId);
return employeeResponse;
}
createEmployee in the service class is used to call another endpoint to insert some data.I want to decide my advice based on the employeeResponse but not able to do so.
I tried #AfterReturning also,but I can't return the object if I use that.
Below is my aspect class:
#Around(value = "execution(* com.test.service.EmployeeService.*(..)) and args(name,empId)")
public Object getAllAdvice2(ProceedingJoinPoint pjp, String name,String empId) throws Throwable {
System.out.println("Inside Aspect");
Object[] arguments = pjp.getArgs();
if (!checkForPath()) {
return pjp.proceed();
}
System.out.println("Call Second path please!!");
return arguments;
}
private boolean checkForPath() {
HttpServletResponse response = ((ServletRequestAttributes) RequestContextHolder.getRequestAttributes())
.getResponse();
return response.getStatus()==501?true:false;
}
}
I did use HttpServletResponse and RequestContextHolder to get the context but seems it will take the present context i.e. "/add/employee".
How can I return the actual status from the checkForPath () (since I don't need to call pjp.proceed for every status code returned) so that I can execute the line System.out.println("Call Second path please!!"); depending on my error code.
Can anyone pls suggest where it is going wrong?
Your aspect code is quite chaotic and does not make much sense:
You are trying to check for a response before calling proceed(), as R.G said. Use something like EmployeeResponse response = (EmployeeResponse) proceed() instead, inspect the response and then decide what to do next.
You already bind the method parameters to name and empId, there is no need to use pjp.getArgs().
return arguments does not make sense because you ought to return an EmployeeResponse object (either the original result or another one), not the array of method arguments.
I'd like to return a data object that contains the details of the error with a BadRequestErrorMessageResult or BadRequestErrorMessageResult object like so:
public IHttpActionResult Action(Model model)
{
var validationResult = model.Validate();
if (validationResult.Successful)
{
// this one's okay; it supports sending data with a 200
return Ok(validationResult);
}
else
{
// However, how do I return a custom data object here
// like so?
// No such overload, I wish there was
// return BadRequest(validationResult);
}
}
The only three overloads of the ApiController.BadRequest() method are:
1. BadRequest();
2. BadRequest(string message);
3. BadRequest(ModelStateDictionary modelState);
Even with #3, a model state dictionary is ultimate a deep collection with one layer upon another, at the bottom of which, though, is a bunch of KeyValuePair<string, ModelError> where each ModelError also only has either a string or an Exception object.
Therefore, even with #3, we are only able to pack a string to send and not a custom object like I want to.
I am really not asking how I may go about working a hack or a kludge around the situation. My question is: is there an overload or another way baked into the .NET API to send an object to the client with a Bad Request HTTP status code?
I am using ASP.NET Web API version 5.2.4 targeting .NET Framework version 4.6.1.
You can use the Content<T>(...) method to do this. It returns a NegotiatedContentResult, which is serialized depending on the request headers (e.g. json, xml), and allows you to specify a HttpStatusCode.
You can use it like this:
return Content(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, myObject);
If you wanted to, you could create your own BadRequest<T>(T obj) method in the controller as a wrapper, so then you could call it as you wanted:
public IHttpActionResult BadRequest<T>(T obj)
{
return Content(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, obj);
}
public IHttpActionResult Action()
{
// do whatever validation here.
var validationResult = Validate();
// then return a bad request
return BadRequest(validationResult);
}
You can build/format the string in JSON format, pass it as string in the BadRequest() parameter and convert it to JSON again or any object on the caller's backend.
Haven't tried that but that should work.
I have a Web API controller that returns data to my client. The code looks like this:
[HttpGet]
[ActionName("Retrieve")]
public IEnumerable<Reference> Retrieve(int subjectId)
{
return _referenceService.Retrieve(subjectId);
}
Can someone tell me is it necessary to specify the ActionName?
Also should I return an IEnumerable, an IList or something else?
I believe if your ASP.NET routing is setup correctly you don't need to specify the ActionName, for example:
protected void Application_Start()
{
RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute("0", "{controller}/{action}/{arg1}");
}
Will match /YourControllerName/Retrieve/132
What you return is based entirely on your media-type formatters, of which the default is XmlFormatter and JsonFormatter. These can be found in GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters and will be chosen based on the Accept header provided by the client.
We, for example, use JSON.Net for our response formatting, configured by:
protected void Application_Start()
{
RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute("0", "{controller}/{action}/{arg1}");
MediaTypeFormatterCollection formatters = GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters;
formatters.Remove(formatters.XmlFormatter);
var jsonFormatter = GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.JsonFormatter.SerializerSettings;
jsonFormatter.Formatting = Formatting.Indented;
jsonFormatter.ContractResolver = new CamelCasePropertyNamesContractResolver();
}
This tells WebApi to disallow any XML formatting and only return JSON using the provided JSON.Net contract resolver. JSON.Net supports serializing IEnumerable.
I would, however, recommend returning a HttpResponseMessage instead. This allows you to set the status code as well (This still uses the media type formatter, it's just a cleaner wrapper). You can use this like so:
[HttpGet]
public HttpResponseMessage Retrieve(int subjectId)
{
var response _referenceService.Retrieve(subjectId);
return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, response);
}
You should return HttpStatusCode instead of data if have not requirement, like POST method should return OK or whatever.
or if want record like Get method should return type of record.
also you no need to add attribute on method like Get,Put,Delete etc because webapi automatically detect method according to action like if you are getting data then your method name should be start with Get like GetEmployee etc.
I am using AutoMoqCustomization in my test conventions.
Consider the code below. Everything works great until I add a constructor to one of the concrete classes. When I do, I get "could not find a parameterless constructor". We know AutoFixture doesn't have an issue with the constructor because it delivered me the test object one which proved to be assignable from IThings... no failure there. So it must be moq.
This makes some sense because I assume builder was generated by moq and passed into the GetCommands method. So I think I can see that control has been passed from AutoFixture to moq at that point.
That takes care of the why, but what should I do about it? Is there a way to instruct moq on how to deal with the ThingOne or is there a way to instruct AutoFixture to ignore moq for IThingBuilders and instead do something Fixtury?
public class TestClass
{
public interface IThingBuilders
{
T1 Build<T1>() where T1 : IThings;
}
public interface IThings
{
}
public class ThingOne : IThings
{
public ThingOne(string someparam)
{
}
}
public class ThingTwo : IThings
{
}
public class SomeClass
{
public List<IThings> GetCommands(IThingBuilders builder)
{
var newlist = new List<IThings>();
newlist.Add(builder.Build<ThingOne>());
newlist.Add(builder.Build<ThingTwo>());
return newlist;
}
}
[Theory, BasicConventions]
public void WhyCannotInstantiateProxyOfClass(ThingOne one, ThingTwo two, IThingBuilders builder, SomeClass sut)
{
Assert.IsAssignableFrom<IThings>(one);
Assert.IsAssignableFrom<IThings>(two);
var actual = sut.GetCommands(builder);
Assert.Equal(1, actual.OfType<ThingOne>().Count());
Assert.Equal(1, actual.OfType<ThingTwo>().Count());
}
}
As there's no extensibility point in Moq that enables AutoFixture to hook in and supply a value of ThingOne, there's not a whole lot you can do.
However, you can use the SetReturnsDefault<T> method of Moq. Modifying the above test would then be like this:
[Theory, BasicConventions]
public void WhyCannotInstantiateProxyOfClass(
ThingOne one, ThingTwo two, IThingBuilders builder, SomeClass sut)
{
Assert.IsAssignableFrom<IThings>(one);
Assert.IsAssignableFrom<IThings>(two);
Mock.Get(builder).SetReturnsDefault(one); // Add this to make the test pass
var actual = sut.GetCommands(builder);
Assert.Equal(1, actual.OfType<ThingOne>().Count());
Assert.Equal(1, actual.OfType<ThingTwo>().Count());
}
This is a bit easier than having to write a specific Setup/Returns pair, but not much. You could move that code to an AutoFixture Customization, but again, since this is a generic method on a a Mock instance, you'll explicitly need to call this for e.g. ThingOne in order to set the default for that return type. Not particularly flexible.
I was wondering if it's possible to use an extension method with asp.net webforms and nvelocity. I would like to set some defaults if the string value is null or empty.
Example of .vm file:
Example of my email body...
Billable Status: $billableStatus.Evaluate()
rest of my email body...
Attempted extension method:
public static class Helper
{
public static string Evaluate(this string value)
{
if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(value))
return "Not Provided";
else
return value;
}
}
Or is there an alternative to what I'm tryting to accomplish?
I don't think NVelocity can resolve extension methods with C#/VB.NET syntax sugar. What I do is register an instance of a helper in the velocity context:
var context = VelocityContext();
context.Put("helper", new Helper());
context.Put("billableStatus", "something");
...
and then in your template:
$helper.Evaluate($billableStatus)
You have to make your helper non-static for this to work, of course.
I came across something similar in past and I was looking for something more sophisticated and with more control. I found that NVelocity does provide a way to intercept the method and property calls but for that you will have to implement certain things. In order to make your custom interceptor you will need to implement NVelocity.IDuck. For example
public class MyClass : NVelocity.IDuck
{
public object GetInvoke(string propName)
{
....
}
public object Invoke(string method, params object[] args)
{
....
}
public void SetInvoke(string propName, object value)
{
....
}
}
Now any instance of MyClass will intercept and pass the method and property calls to our these three function implementation and give us a chance to resolve and return the output. You may notice from these three function signatures that in order to implement them we may need some reflection where we can locate respective methods on available extension types and execute them. If needed you can read following blog post for more details about going this way. NVelocity and extension methods