I follow the best F# practices from .Net documentation:
I create a project for the Application (console, not library)
I create a project for the Tests (with Expecto but doesn't matter)
Problem: Some of my Application modules are not exposed via the internal keyword. Thus I cannot import these modules in my Tests project.
=> How can I perform unit testing of these modules? Should I remove the internal access control?
Thanks!
To test internal, you can use InternalsVisibleTo, to test private classes, you can link the files in your test project (when you are in the "add file" dialog, you can select link, instead of open).
However, as already has been commented, generally you would only test the public interface. But occasionally you want to separately test complex internals as well. For instance in the .NET runtime libraries, this is often done (there are a lot of complex internals), and they use the linking approach a lot.
Since private really means private to the class, and you won't even be able to access such members from an extension method, you should put such members in their own private class, as public members. That way, when you link, the class is accessible, and the members as well, but neither are accessible in your production version.
Use this technique sparingly, because it will bind your private details to the test system, and you won't be as free to change the internal implementation.
Related
I am novices to the field of Identity and Access management.
Till now I know, Sail point has provided the some direct connectors to integrate the known systems like LDAP, HR systems, OIM, Databases..
And sailpoint also provided the support for disconnected applications with the use of Custom connectors.
Here, My question is how to develop a custom connector..?
I do not have jar file provided by sailpoint which contain "AbstractConnector" class.
So that I can write my own class and develop..?
I also so not understand, what to do with that class?(if i have a jar)
How sailpoint will refer to that class..
Do we need to deploy that class to somewhere...
Here I am expecting the complete flow to develop and deploy the custom connector..
If anyone is working please help..
If you unzip your identityiq.war, you'll find a JAR file called WEB-INF/lib/connector-bundle.jar. This is the JAR where you'll find AbstractConnector. Once you've written your connector code, you will need to compile it and bundle it into a JAR file, which you will place into WEB-INF/lib.
Finally, you will need to update the ConnectorRegistry object (under Configuration on the debug screen) to reference the new class, which will make it available as an Application type. If it has custom connection parameters (as most do), you will also need an xhtml page that will be embedded into the Sailpoint UI to prompt the user configuring the Application.
If you have Compass access, they have a whitepaper called Custom Connectors that you will find helpful.
All that said, I encourage you to try to find a way to use an out-of-box connector if possible.
Most of the times it will be better if you use the DelimitedFile connector, you can import a CSV of identity data, and make it work within Sailpoint's workflow. You will be able to map fields, correlate accounts and create multi-valued group memberships rapidly. Of course, this means that Sailpoint will not be connected directly to the application, and you will have to develop a workflow to extract the identities and upload them. But at least, you can integrate without going the Custom Connector way.
I've got two questions here. The first one is just specific and another one is more general, but is a source of the first one.
So, my specific problem: I want to use Encryption (actually, Hashing) algorithms with using System.Security.Cryptography namespace (for instance, SHA256Managed class).
I found out that (happily) Xamarin has implemented those in System.dll.
But it is not portable and obviously can not be used from Core application directly.
But I've also found another great project -- PclContrib -- which allows you to do that. But, unfortunately, they don't have the implementation for Touch and Android. (However, that still works great for Desktop (Web) and Windows Phone, plus, still can be included into Core (as it uses portable project)).
Anyway, to solve that nicely, I've decided to create some base class for the encryption methods and then override core methods which require the custom dll (for any custom system).
The way I did it (at least, trying to do) was:
Defining virtual method in Core App base class:
public virtual IEncryptionProvider CreateEncryptionProvider()
Overriding Core App class in Touch project with overriding CreateEncryptionProvider (which creates an instance of TouchEncryptionProvider class instance).
Core:
public class App : MvxApplication
Touch:
public class AppTouch : App
Launching it in Touch setup.cs:
protected override Cirrious.MvvmCross.ViewModels.IMvxApplication CreateApp (
{
return new AppTouch();
}
But, that does not work for me. On startup I've got this exception message in log:
"Exception masked KeyNotFoundException: Could not find view for Mynamespace.Etc.LoginViewModel", which works fine when I do new App() instead. I am not sure if that message shows actual problem (as before it was saying the same even that was a problem with some third-party dll, unrelated to views at all). But speaking shortly, that's just a primitive inheritance of App : MvxApplication, but placed not in Core but Touch project.
So, does it requeire some more custom initialization for such situations or do I miss something else?
And, actually, more general question is how should I build such Multiplatform approaches? Actually, now I've got similar problem with HttpUtility.UrlEncode, which I would want to use in my Core project.
What is the MvvmCross "philosophy" to handle such situations?
Thank you.
For the 'viewmodel not found' problem, this is caused because mvvmcross by default only looks for viewmodels in the Assembly containing your app.
If you want it to look in other assemblies, override ViewModelAssemblies in Setup.cs - see how this done in, for example, MvvmCross - structuring shared View Models and Views
For general multplatform approach, please read questions and answers like:
Platform-specific IoC in MVVMCross
Instantiation of ViewModels and Service classes
Please also remember you don't have to use PCLs - if you prefer to use file-linking between multiple platform-specific core projects, then you can of course use this approach.
Finally, please also try to ask one question per question - I find it makes stackoverflow work better for users and with search engines too. If you need to link questions, then you can just add a hyperlink reference - stackoverflow then marks them as related.
I understand C# Code Fragments and .NET Assemblies offer the same functionality for modular template development. We manage the code fragments in the CME and assembly code in Visual Studio, but use both the same way in Template Builder.
In terms of code, I can create a C# Code Fragment Template Building Block (TBB), for example:
var timeStamp = DateTime.Now.ToString("d MMM yyyy");
package.PushItem("timeStamp from fragment", package.CreateHtmlItem(timeStamp));
I can also create a .NET assembly Template Building Block using the same code by implementing ITemplate as below.
using System;
using Tridion.ContentManager.Templating;
using Tridion.ContentManager.Templating.Assembly;
namespace CreateAndBreakTemplates
{
[TcmTemplateTitle("Add Date to Package")]
public class AddDateToPackage : ITemplate
{
public void Transform(Engine engine, Package package)
{
var timeStamp = DateTime.Now.ToString("d MMM yyyy");
package.PushItem("timeStamp from assembly",
package.CreateHtmlItem(timeStamp));
}
}
}
The docs explain that "SDL Tridion inserts the code fragment in its predefined method of a predefined class." It looks like this class implements ITemplate and adds some references below (am I missing anything?).
The assembly setup instructions mention at least these dlls.
Tridion.Common.dll
Tridion.ContentManager.dll
Tridion.ContentManager.Templating.dll
Tridion.ContentManager.Publishing.dll
Any other difference between fragment and assembly and how would you choose between the two?
A C# fragment is compiled into an assembly by Tridion when the template is first invoked and after it's been modified. To compile the fragment, Tridion wraps it in some "dungeon dressing" (bonus points for those who know where that term comes from) that:
Uses the Tridion.ContentManager, Tridion.ContentManager.CommunicationManagement, Tridion.ContentManager.ContentManagement and Tridion.ContentManager.Templating namespaces
Makes the Package and Engine available in fields called package and engine respectively
Creates a logger for the C# fragment that is available through a field called log
Adds references to some commonly used assemblies (but does not add a using for their namespaces yet)
Edit: given the other answers it seems many people are not aware of how to accomplish certain tasks in C# fragment TBBs, so I'll document them below:
Import additional namespaces
To import/use additional namespaces into your C# fragment, you need to use this syntax:
<%# Import Namespace="Tridion.ContentManager.ContentManagement.Fields" %>
Note that this will only import namespaces from assemblies that are already referenced by Tridion. There is no mechanism for you to add references to other assemblies explicitly; so if you need a third-party DLL, you will need to add it to the GAC.
Defining custom functions
You can define custom fields and functions in your C# fragment by using this syntax:
<%!
public static string GetDate()
{
return new DateTime().ToString("u").Replace(" ", "T");
}
%>
Defining member fields and (nested) classes
The syntax for defining custom functions also allows you to define nested classes and/or member fields:
<%!
public class MyLittleHelper
{
public MyLittleHelper(string param1)
{
}
}
%>
Frank has explained the difference between the two approaches, but that still leaves the question of how to choose between the two. My personal advise is to never use C# fragments for anything, with only one exception*. As you have found out, there is some dark magic going on in them that I personally do not like. Also, there is so much you cannot do in them that a .NET programmer is quite fond of, such as creating classes.
Putting my personal taste aside, I see only one reason why you would ever resort to C# fragments: if you do not have access to Visual Studio or another tool that builds DLLs. And that is not a very strong argument either: if you want a job done, you should get the proper tools!
*The exception being the C# fragments that Tridion automatically creates for each ITemplate in your assembly, of course.
The main differences between C# code Fragment and .net Assemblies in my point of view are categorized into below high level buckets.
Step-by-Step Debugging
With .net assemblies you could do step-by-step debugging from visual studio where as C# Code fragments it is not possible.
Re-Use or Base Classes
With .net assemblies you could extend ITemplate to create something like BaseTemplate and all your template could extend them so you have common design pattern, where as C# there is no concept of BaseTemplate other than Tridion ITemplate interface.
With .net assemblies you could add common utility classes (often TridionUtilities) and all your templates refer to the same TridionUtilities for common functionality. C# code fragment the utility functions need to be defined within the same TBB and cannot be reused with other TBBs unless you create a class and deploy to GAC.
Easier Upgrade Scans and Maintenance
With .net assemblies it is easier to do any upgrade scans like deprecated APIs/Methods simply referring to new dlls/.net framework. .net assemblies make it easy to identify potential impacts on planning either Tridion upgrades or .net framework upgrades. C# code fragments it is much harder to find the deprecated or any impacts of upgrade.
Developer Friendly
Obviously .net assemblies are developed using Visual Studio (developers love it!) vs. C# Code Fragments in a Text Editor (painful).
When I started back with Tridion 5.3, started with C# code fragments and quickly realized what a mistake I made for not going .net assemblies.
My vote is always .net assemblies and C# code fragments is not even in consideration unless I don't have a choice. lol..
I think the differences indeed are best explained by Frank's answer, as to how would you choose between the two. I normally say, since you are using Visual Studio anyways, always create a .NET Assembly TBB for your code. They offer you a lot more benefits like including 3rd party assemblies, allow for proper coding with classes and methods a lot easier and probably most important, allow for proper debugging (although this last one can be hard to setup depending on where you are, thinking of customer environments, firewalls etc.).
There are for me only two exceptions for using C# Fragments:
The references to classes implementing ITemplate in an assembly, allowing you to use these as separate TBBs
If there is a requirement to manage constants or other hardcoded constants directly from SDL Tridion
Number 2 is of course debatable, but you never can do without configuration properties, for a TBB most of these you can handle using a Parameters Schema, but sometimes it is just a lot easier, to directly write them in a C# Fragment and have that push them to the package for other TBBs to use.
In my training sessions, I usually referred to the following story of the only time I ever choose to use a C# Fragment TBB so far, indicating how much of an exception it is to use them:
I was working at a customer abroad, and my taxi for the airport was leaving in 10 minutes when one of the developers I was coaching asked me a question on how to get a list of items from a Folder in his TBB. I had already closed my Visual Studio and Outlook and was about to shutdown my laptop, but quickly browsed through some of my code samples to find what he needed. Knowing that starting up Visual Studio or Outlook would take a few minutes, I quickly pasted the code in a C# Fragment so he had it for easy reference.
I would never use C# fragments for the sole reason that it makes management of your code quite difficult and you need to manually deploy them. And if you do write your code from Visual Studio, then you should create a .NET Building Block assembly.
A friend of mine is working on a legacy VB6 project. I haven't touched that language in ten years, so I'm pretty rusty. Anyway, is there any kind of reflection API for VB6? Specifically, he needs a way to iterate the properties (and types) of a user-created Class. (In other words, not an external COM object, but an internal "Class Module" as it's called.)
How can this be done?
Jay's answer is the way to go if your project is an ActiveX (ActiveX EXE, DLL, or OCX, as opposed to Standard EXE), and if the classes are public.
However, you mentioned that your friend wants to do this with "internal class modules". I'm not sure if you are referring to private .cls files (classes), or .bas files (modules), but either way, you can only use the TypeLib Information Object Library to reflect on public classes, user-defined types, constants, or enumerations.
You cannot use the library to reflect modules, private classes, or anything else that is declared private.
As a general rule of thumb, you can only use reflection on the things that you can see in the Object Browser when viewing your project's contents from another project. That is, if you compile your project, create a new project, add the first project as a reference, and then view the first project's contents in the Object Browser, anything you can see in the Object Browser can be accessed via the TypeLib Information Object Library. If something is not listed in the Object Browser, then you won't be able to use the TypeLib Information Object Library to reflect it.
VB6 doesn't have any built-in support for run-time reflection or introspection. Using the TypeLib Information Object Library for reflection works for ActiveX VB6 projects because ActiveX projects are compiled in COM components with embedded type libraries, but as mentioned you can only access the data types that are publicly exposed in the compiled component's type library. Using the Object Browser is a quick way to determine what is in the type library because the Object Browser actually inspects the component's type library to populate what you see in the Object Browser, as long as you are viewing the component's contents from a separate project (if you view the component from its own VB6 project, it will display public and private data structures, i.e. everything that is visible in the IDE).
Is this the sort of thing you're looking for:
Visual Basic: Inspect COM Components Using the TypeLib Information Object Library
It's discussed on this thread here on SO: Self Inspection of VB6 UDTs
I've never tried this stuff myself.
I have a Web service which, when updated on one computer with VS2008 works perfectly fine, but on another computer does not. The critical difference is the contents of the auto-generated Reference.cs.
In the correctly functioning environment, the methods have fully qualified class names, refering to classes in a class library. However, in the problem environment, the class names are unqualified and partial classes are declared near the end of the file. E.g.
public string MyMethod(MyClass pr_Class)
...
public partial class MyClass {
}
versus
public string MyMethod(Class.Library.Namespace.MyClass pr_Class)
This causes errors such as:
'<ClassType>' is an ambiguous reference between <ClassLibraryNamespace>.ClassType and <WebReferenceNamespace>.ClassType
The code is under source control. Checking out to the working environment works straight away, checking out to the problem environment will only work if the reference.cs is manually edited to be like the working environments. Transferring the project manually from problem environment to the working one only requires an "Update Web Reference" to be performed to allow compilation. Both Reference.cs files claim to be auto-generated by the same tool version. The settings from the good environment have been exported to the other. No success so far...
Any ideas would be greatly appreciated!
Matt
Ok, so I have the answer. The working environment has a long forgotten extension library for importing web references. Customizing generated Web Service proxies explains the procedure. I'm new to the project and so had no idea about this!