I am generating API reference from C# project.
The project is part of big solution and has long name convention for assemblies and namespaces, so every namespace in project goes like [CompanyName].[System].[Area].[Module].[...] (e.g. MyBiz.CRM.Sales.Analytics.Persistence.Common and MyBiz.CRM.Sales.Analytics.Persistence.Sql).
Since all namespaces in project start with MyBiz.CRM.Sales. and I generate reference for each system and area separately, I want to exclude MyBiz.CRM.Sales. in TOC on left side and only mention it in title/header.
Is it possible in docFX or I need to write custom server side post-build event script?
Thanks in advance
I also had the same problem and solved it by writing a template. The only thing it does is overriding the preTransform hook which you need to specify in a file named toc.extension.js. There I strip the long namespace prefix. As I have a TOC in several layers, I do that recursively. You can most probably hard-code it for the level you need. My code looks as follows:
exports.preTransform = function (model) {
// replace recursively the root namespace by ""
transformItem(model, 1);
return model;
function transformItem(item, level) {
if (item.name) {
item.name = item.name.replace("Some.Very.Long.Namespace.Prefix.", '');
} else {
item.name = null;
}
if (item.items && item.items.length > 0) {
var length = item.items.length;
for (var i = 0; i < length; i++) {
transformItem(item.items[i], level + 1);
};
}
}
}
Afterwards, I simply specify the own template in addition to the default template in docfx.json which causes the hook to be called. That works as follows:
"build": {
"template": [
"default",
"/path/to/your/template/folder"
]
}
References: Docfx: How to create a custom template
Related
I have a Guidewire Gunit for a transformer in gosu which queries the system table to get a description for a result code which is working fine when run on the server but Gunit fails for the same.
I have tried the annotation #ServerTest for Gunit but that is failing as well.
The same code works fine in Gosu scratchpad.
PFA the code snippet as follows:
var resultCodes = Query.make(SystemTable).select().where(\elt -> elt.ResultCode == "AS01")
var description = ""
if(resultCodes != null && !resultCodes.isEmpty())
{
description = resultCodes.get(0).getFullDescription()
}
I'm getting the exception as follows :
java.lang.IllegalStateException: TableMetadataFactory cannot be used before it is started
Thanks,
Deepti
(Suggestion : )If your requirement is just to query based on some values.
Better dont use that .where() condition.
This is like SELECT * FROM <TABLE> and after getting all the data you are picking out your required result.
The best and the actual way is to use like
Query.make(TABLE_NAME).compare(TABLE_NAME#FIELD_NAME,Relop.Equals,"value_to_compare").select();
Query will be like
SELECT * FROM <TABLE_NAME> WHERE FIELD_NAME = FIELD_VALUE_TO_COMPARE;
While running Gunits, GW uses Shadow tables which will be basically empty.
Here if you are using OOTB entities, You can use Builder classes
or if you need to use some custom entities, use bundles to insert data first.
After inserting data into SystemTable (either using builder classes or bundles) run the below code.
var resultCodes = Query.make(SystemTable).compare(SystemTable#ResultCode ,Relop.Equals,"AS01").select()
foreach(result in resultCodes){
description = result.FullDescription
print("Output : "+description);
}
This happens when your RunLevel is set too low. Run levels below "NO_DAEMONS" will not load system tables. The default should be "NO_DAEMONS" so if you have an annotation on your test like this:
#RunLevel(gw.api.system.server.Runlevel.NONE)
either remove it or increase the level.
You can refactor your code like this:
uses gw.testharness.RunLevel
uses gw.api.database.Query
uses org.mockito.Mockito
uses gw.api.database.IQueryBeanResult
#RunLevel(NONE)
class StackOverflowTest {
function testDoQuery() {
var rs = Mockito.mock(IQueryBeanResult<SystemTable>)
var query = Mockito.mock(Query<SystemTable>)
Mockito.when(query.select()).thenReturn(rs)
var stackOverflow = Mockito.spy(new StackOverflow())
Mockito.doReturn(query).when(stackOverflow).getSystemTableQuery()
stackOverflow.doQuery()
Mockito.verify(stackOverflow, Mockito.times(1)).getSystemTableQuery()
Mockito.verify(query, Mockito.times(1)).select()
Mockito.verify(rs, Mockito.times(1)).iterator()
}
class StackOverflow {
function doQuery() {
var resultCodes = getSystemTableQuery().select().where(\elt -> elt.ResultCode == "AS01")
}
protected function getSystemTableQuery(): Query<SystemTable> {
return Query.make(SystemTable)
}
}
}
Using Alfresco Community 5.0.d and not able to get organization from node.
File: pickerresults.lib.js
Method: createPersonResult(node)
function createPersonResult(node)
{
var personObject =
{
typeShort: node.typeShort,
isContainer: false,
properties: {},
displayPath: node.displayPath,
nodeRef: "" + node.nodeRef
}
// define properties for person
personObject.properties.userName = node.properties.userName;
// defining new property for the personObject but
// but not getting any value
personObject.properties.companyname = (node.properties["cm:organization"] ? node.properties["cm:organization"] : "");
personObject.properties.companyname = (node.properties.organization ? node.properties.organization : "");
return personObject;
}
Override the pickerresults.lib.js file by copying it to location as below.
/Applications/alfresco-5.0.d/tomcat/shared/classes/alfresco/extension/templates/webscripts/org/alfresco/repository/forms/pickerresults.lib.js
how could I get organization name?
also how could I debug the node properties like logger.log is there but does not work here.
Thanks.
please try to get properties without extra "." in
node.properties.["cm:organization"]
like:
node.properties["cm:organization"]
please refer this doc link
http://docs.alfresco.com/4.0/references/API-JS-ScriptNode.html
properties
Provides access to all the properties of this node. The properties returned are accessed via an associative array. Properties of a node can be accessed in the following ways:
Example: node.properties["name"]
Example: node.properties.name
example i have tried:
var node =people.getPerson("admin");
logger.log(node.properties["cm:email"]);
logger.log(node.properties.email);
I'm doing a GUI Extension of User Interface (SiteEdit) by overriding the behaviour of one of the javascript files, to add some funcionality.
The javascript file is "/Scripts/Components/ExtComponentField.js" and the target is "SiteEdit" extending:
Tridion.Web.UI.Editors.SiteEdit.Views.Content
All works well with the extension, and I have what I wanted to have, but now I'm trying to use the
settings/customconfiguration/clientconfiguration
node of the extension config, to use some initialization parameters, but there is no way to access $config element in the javascript, and Tridion.Core.Configuration.Editors["myExt"].configuration is null.
I've seen using this customconfiguration in various javascripts like "Dashboard" or "Footprints", but is it possible to have it on "Content"? am I missing something on the extension config?
I'm afraid I didn't test this but you should be able to use:
Extensions.YourExt.getConfigurationItem = function (itemName, editorName)
{
var editor = $config.Editors[editorName].configuration;
if (editor)
{
var confXml = $xml.getNewXmlDocument(editor);
var confObj = $xml.toJson(confXml);
if (confObj[itemName])
return confObj[itemName];
else
return "";
}
}
You can then use it in the following way:
$this.getConfigurationItem("YOUR_CONFIG_ITEM_NAME", "YOUR_EDITOR_NAME").toString();
In your extension configuration (below the <theme> node) you can enter your own configuration values:
<customconfiguration>
<clientconfiguration xmlns="http://www.sdltridion.com/2009/GUI/Configuration/Merge">
<YOUR_CONFIG_ITEM_NAME>The value</YOUR_CONFIG_ITEM_NAME>
Can you confirm :)
I usually use a separate JS file with the following:
Type.registerNamespace("Extensions.Namespace");
Extensions.Namespace.getEditorConfigSection = function Editor$getEditorConfigSection() {
if (this._settings === undefined) {
var editor = $config.Editors["ThisEditorName"];
if (editor && editor.configuration && !String.isNullOrEmpty(editor.configuration)) {
var configSectionXmlDoc = $xml.getNewXmlDocument(editor.configuration);
this._settings = $xml.toJson(configSectionXmlDoc.documentElement);
}
}
return this._settings;
};
and in the configuration add it in a separate group:
<cfg:group name="Extensions.Namespace" merge="always">
<cfg:fileset>
<cfg:file type="script">/Scripts/Definitions.js</cfg:file>
</cfg:fileset>
</cfg:group>
Then wherever you need it, you can add the following dependency:
<cfg:dependency>Extensions.Namespace</cfg:dependency>
Then I usually use a function like this to get a certain configuration value:
Extensions.Namespace.Something.prototype._getMyConfigValue = function Something$_getMyConfigValue() {
var configSection = Extensions.Namespace.getEditorConfigSection();
if (configSection) {
return configSection.myconfigvalue;
}
};
The code contained in the "Content" group is running inside of the IFRAME which is hosting your published web page. As you can imagine, the amount of files included there should be minimized and so quite a lot of functionality is not available.
My suggestion would be to read the configuration only in the main window and then pass along the settings that you need to the code running in the IFRAME -- through the use of the Tridion.Utils.CrossDomainMessaging utility class ($xdm).
We are rying to use WF with multiple tracking participants which essentially listen to different queries - one for activity states, one for custom tracknig records which are a subclass of CustomTrackingRecord.
The problem is that we can use both TrackingParticipants indivisually, but not together - we never get our subclass from CustomTrackingRecord but A CustomTrackingRecord.
If I put bopth queries into one TrackingParticipant and then handle everythign in one, both work perfectly (which indicates teh error is not where we throw them).
The code in question for the combined one is:
public WorkflowServiceTrackingParticipant ()
{
this.TrackingProfile = new TrackingProfile()
{
ActivityDefinitionId = "*",
ImplementationVisibility = ImplementationVisibility.All,
Name = "WorkflowServiceTrackingProfile",
Queries = {
new CustomTrackingQuery() { Name = "*", ActivityName = "*" },
new ActivityStateQuery() {
States = {
ActivityStates.Canceled,
ActivityStates.Closed,
ActivityStates.Executing,
ActivityStates.Faulted
}
},
}
};
}
When using two TrackingParticipants we have two TrackingProfile (with different names) that each have one of the queries.
in the track method, when using both separate, the lines:
protected override void Track(TrackingRecord record, TimeSpan timeout)
{
Console.WriteLine("*** ActivityTracking: " + record.GetType());
if (record is ActivityBasedTrackingRecord)
{
System.Diagnostics.Debugger.Break();
}
never result in the debugger hitting, when using only the one to track our CustomTrackingRecord subclass (ActivityBasedTrackingRecord) then it works.
Anyone else knows about this? For now we have combined both TrackingParticipants into one, but this has the bad side effect that we can not dynamically expand the logging possibilities, which we would love to. Is this a known issue with WWF somewhere?
Version used: 4.0 Sp1 Feature Update 1.
I guess I encounterad the exact same problem.
This problem occurs due to the restrictions of the extension mechanism. There can be only one instance per extension type per workflow instance (according to Microsoft's documentation). Interesting enough though, one can add multiple instances of the same type to one workflow's extensions which - in case of TrackingParticipant derivates - causes weird behavior, because only one of their tracking profiles is used for all participants of the respective type, but all their overrides of the Track method are getting invoked.
There is a (imho) ugly workaround to this: derive a new participant class from TrackingParticipant for each task (task1, task2, logging ...)
Regards,
Jacob
I think that this problem isn't caused by extension mechanism, since DerivedParticipant 1 and DerivedParticipant 2 are not the same type(WF internals just use polymorphism on the base class).
I was running on the same issue, my Derived1 was tracking records that weren't described in its profile.
Derived1.TrackingProfile.Name was "Foo" and Derived2.TrackingProfile.Name was null
I changed the name from null to "Bar" and it worked as expected.
Here is a WF internal reference code, describing how is the Profile selected
// System.Activities.Tracking.RuntimeTrackingProfile.RuntimeTrackingProfileCache
public RuntimeTrackingProfile GetRuntimeTrackingProfile(TrackingProfile profile, Activity rootElement)
{
RuntimeTrackingProfile runtimeTrackingProfile = null;
HybridCollection<RuntimeTrackingProfile> hybridCollection = null;
lock (this.cache)
{
if (!this.cache.TryGetValue(rootElement, out hybridCollection))
{
runtimeTrackingProfile = new RuntimeTrackingProfile(profile, rootElement);
hybridCollection = new HybridCollection<RuntimeTrackingProfile>();
hybridCollection.Add(runtimeTrackingProfile);
this.cache.Add(rootElement, hybridCollection);
}
else
{
ReadOnlyCollection<RuntimeTrackingProfile> readOnlyCollection = hybridCollection.AsReadOnly();
foreach (RuntimeTrackingProfile current in readOnlyCollection)
{
if (string.CompareOrdinal(profile.Name, current.associatedProfile.Name) == 0 && string.CompareOrdinal(profile.ActivityDefinitionId, current.associatedProfile.ActivityDefinitionId) == 0)
{
runtimeTrackingProfile = current;
break;
}
}
if (runtimeTrackingProfile == null)
{
runtimeTrackingProfile = new RuntimeTrackingProfile(profile, rootElement);
hybridCollection.Add(runtimeTrackingProfile);
}
}
}
return runtimeTrackingProfile;
}
I've created an ASP.Net user control that will get placed more than once inside of web page. In this control I've defined a javascript object such as:
function MyObject( options )
{
this.x = options.x;
}
MyObject.prototype.someFunction=function someFunctionF()
{
return this.x + 1;
}
In the code behind I've created MyObject in a startup script --
var opts = { x: 99 };
var myObject = new MyObject( opts );
When a certain button in the control is pressed it will call myObject.someFunction(). Now lets say the value of x will be 99 for one control but 98 for another control. The problem here is that the var myObject will be repeated and only the last instance will matter. Surely there's a way to make the var myObject unique using some concept I've haven't run across yet. Ideas?
Thanks,
Craig
Your Javascript like this:-
function MyObject(options) { this.x = options.x; }
MyObject.prototype.someFunction = function() { return this.x + 1; }
MyObject.create(id, options) {
if (!this._instances) this._instances = {};
return this._instances[id] = new MyObject(options);
}
MyObject.getInstance(id) { return this._instances[id]; }
Your startup javascript like this:-
MyObject.create(ClientID, {x: 99});
Other code that needs to use an instance (say in the client-side onclick event)
String.Format("onclick=\"MyObject.getInstance('{0}').someFunction()\", ClientID);
Note the low impact on the clients global namespace, only the MyObject identifier is added to the global namespace, regardless of how many instances of your control are added to the page.
If it is just one value, why not have the function take it as a parameter and build your onclick handler so that it puts the correct value in for each control. If it is more complex than that, then consider making options an array and, for each control, insert the correct options into the spot in the array that corresponds to each particular control. Then pass the proper index into the array into the function.
I do this by using ScriptManager.RegisterClientScriptBlock to register a string as a JavaScript block on the client side. I can then modify my script string using {0}, {1}..,{n} place holders to inject necessary ids. It depends on the structure of your code as to if this is the most elegant fashion, but it works in a pinch. You could then inject variable names using references to Me.ClientID.
You can make the value of "x" static and access it anywhere in the code, such as:
function MyObject( options ) { MyObject.x = options.x; }
MyObject.x = 99; // static
MyObject.prototype.someFunction = function () { return MyObject.x + 1; }
This way you can access MyObject.x anywhere in your code, even without re-instanciating MyObject.
Excellent solution Anthony. The other solutions offered were as good and I did consider them but I was looking for something a little more elegant like this solution.
Thanks!