I have the following user model:
use Illuminate\Contracts\Auth\MustVerifyEmail;
class User extends Model implements AuthenticatableContract,
AuthorizableContract,
CanResetPasswordContract,
MustVerifyEmail {
use Authenticatable, Authorizable, CanResetPassword, HasApiTokens, Notifiable;
public function sendEmailVerificationNotification()
{
$this->notify(new VerifyEmailNotification());
}
//...
}
However I'm getting the following error:
Class App\User contains 2 abstract methods and must therefore be declared abstract or implement the remaining methods (Illuminate\Contracts\Auth\MustVerifyEmail::hasVerifiedEmail, Illuminate\Contracts\Auth\MustVerifyEmail::markEmailAsVerified)
Why do I need to implement these two methods. Theres nothing in the docs regarding this?
Those methods are available in the MustVerifyEmail trait.
use \Illuminate\Auth\MustVerifyEmail;
See: Illuminate/Auth/MustVerifyEmail.php
Either add this trait and/or overload whatever you want, or add the other 2 methods and add your own business logic.
Related
I have an abstract controller which has a function getStatusAction to render a status based on the entity which will come as parameter.
abstract class HumanController extends CRUDController
{
public function getStatusAction(Human $human)
{
// return new Response ...
}
}
Human is an entity class but also abstract. One child is for example man.
So i create a ManController
class ManController extends HumanController
{
}
If i now call in my twig template the getStatusAction with something like
{{ path('path_to_man_controller_status_action', {'human' : '12'}) }}
An error occurs, because some mechanism tries to guess that my parameter is a human which is an abstract class. But this cannot be instantiated.
The provided class Human is abstract, and can not be instantiated
Instead i want that the mechanism should load the entity from my concrete class, in this case Man.
Yes, the framework can't know what class is meant, but how to solve this? I want to have one central function which is doing something with all my entities which are childs of the Human class. I don't want to write the getStatusAction function over and over again in my child classes.
So, is it at least possible to overwrite the abstract class function definition (with getStatusAction(Man $man)) but keep the implementation of the original class?
If not, is it possible to turn off the symfony automatic entity loading mechanism to pass just the entities trough my function?
Some other smart ideas? Thanks.
I got a method able to create a CSV file thanks to StreamedResponse object of Symfony2 framework. I use the method several times so I put a callback parameter to personalise the behavior (I forget the buzz word for this practice in Object-Oriented Programming).
Where is the best place to put this method in a MVC project?
Repository? (Model/DAO/Manager)
Entity? (POPO)
Controller
Service
Through a interface (This object able to create CSV file)
Other
As your logic returns a response, the most adapted context is a controller.
Also, if your logic is called from multiple contexts or by multiple classes of the same context (e.g. controllers), to avoid duplicated code, you have two possibilities (at least) :
1 - Use an AbstractController and make your controllers extends the abstract.
2- Use a service (i.e. CsvManager).
If you want some example implementations, see Symfony2 reusable functions in controllers and the Controller as a service chapter of the Symfony documentation.
An example of service implementation:
// src/AppBundle/Services/CsvManager.php
class CsvManager
{
public function generate(/** params */)
{
// Return your streamed response
}
}
The service declaration :
// app/config/services.yml
services:
# ...
app.csv_manager:
class: AppBundle\Services\CsvManager
Now, you can use the service from all your controllers and other contexts that implements the services container. example:
// src/AppBundle/Controller/TestController.php;
class TestController extends \Symfony\Bundle\FrameworkBundle\Controller\Controller
{
public function printCsvAction()
{
$csvManager = $this->get('app.csv_manager');
return $csvManager->generate(/** params */);
}
}
I have a big set of classes (like more that 100) and they are all extend from some abstract class, let's call it ParentClass. Let's call child classes ChildA,ChildB, etc. How can I register custom deserializer for all children and get class type inside my Deserializer?
I tried:
module.addDeserializer(ParentClass.class, new MyObjectDeserializer());
but it does not work.
I want to skip doing (what is working):
module.addDeserializer(ChildA.class, new MyObjectDeserializer(ChildA.class));
module.addDeserializer(ChildB.class, new MyObjectDeserializer(ChildB.class));
module.addDeserializer(ChildC.class, new MyObjectDeserializer(ChildC.class));
//etc......
Class type should be known, as I am use Jackson for spring #RequestBody method, what have defined class name there.
Any ideas how this can be done?
As far as I know, I don't think there is a mechanism in jackson that will address your exact needs.
However, there are a couple alternatives you can try.
Deserializing polymorphic types with Jackson describes one such alternative, however, you would still need to explicitly define all of the supported subtypes.
Another alternative that would not require you to explicitly define deserialization relationships would be to change your class hierarchy from one of inheritance to that of a container.
For example, converting your abstract parent class to a container like so:
public class DataContainer<T> {
String commonString;
Integer commonInteger;
T subData;
}
Would allow you to simply define in your controller input function as
public String controllerFunction(DataContainer<ClassA> classA);
without a need to define all these subclass deserializations.
Late to the party but I had a similar problem which I solved by registering a custom Deserializers to my SimpleModule. The code is in Kotlin but it should be easy to port it to Java.
The class itself:
class UseBaseClassSimpleDeserializers(
private val baseClass: Class<*>,
private val baseClassDeserializer: JsonDeserializer<*>
) : SimpleDeserializers() {
#Throws(JsonMappingException::class)
override fun findBeanDeserializer(
type: JavaType?,
config: DeserializationConfig?,
beanDesc: BeanDescription?
): JsonDeserializer<*>? {
val beanDeserializer = super.findBeanDeserializer(type, config, beanDesc)
return if (beanDeserializer == null && baseClass.isAssignableFrom(type!!.rawClass)) {
baseClassDeserializer
} else {
beanDeserializer
}
}
}
How to register the custom Deserializers class to a SimpleModule:
val simpleModule = SimpleModule()
simpleModule.setDeserializers(UseBaseClassSimpleDeserializers(ParentClass::class.java, ParentClassDeserializer()))
I'm building a small application with Nancy
I want to have a kind of base class, that other modules can inherit from.
See below (there is a reason this isn't an abstract class, which I'll explain below)
public class ImportModule<T> : NancyModule
{
protected ImportModule()
: this(typeof(T).Name.ToLower())
{
Get["/"] = _ => "need to select an action - xxx";
Get["/importnew"] = _ => ImportNew(); //note - method omitted for brevity
}
}
When I run my app, I get
Unable to resolve type: My.NameSpace.TypedImporter`1
As a sidenote, if the ImportModule class is abstract, this doesn't happen
Ok-
Now, I could have a class like this:
public class MyCustomImporter : ImportModule<MyCustomType>
{
//overrides....
}
But, elsewhere, in a "DefaultImportModule" I have the following:
var importerModule = Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(ImportModule<>).MakeGenericType(type));
So I need to be able to create a type of importer, based on a type that's passed in
(Basically, if a user hits the url /customer, it's doing the same as a class like this would)
public class CustomerImporter : ImporterModule<Customer>
{
}
So, as I see it, I have two choices:
1) Stop nancy trying to map my ImportModule
2) Instantiate a "phantom class" that inherits from ImportModule and make ImportModule abstract again
There is a discussion in the Nancy group that may be related to your problem, it is certainly related to the non-abstract base modules not being recognised by Nancy. Here is what Andreas Håkansson had to say:
Nancy locates everything that's inheriting NancyModule and assumes
it's something it can instantiate. Nancy is aware that it cannot
create an instance of an abstract module. So if you have a base-module
that's not abstract then Nancy will attempt to new it up. I'd like to
think that for 99% of the time, having a non-abstract base class is a
broken design.
And here is the link to the discussion:Unable to resolve type: Nancy.Routing.DefaultRouteResolver
I have a doubt,.... How would you create a Singleton class in Flex...
Is there any convention like the class name should eb Singleton or it should extend any other class.
How many Singleton class can a project have?
Can anyone say the real time usage of a Singleton class?
I am planning to keep my components label texts in a Singleton class... Is it a good approach.
Can of worms asking about singletons!
There are a few different options about creating singletons mainly due to AS3 not having private constructors. Here's the pattern we use.
package com.foo.bar {
public class Blah {
private static var instance : Blah;
public function Blah( enforcer : SingletonEnforcer ) {}
public static function getInstance() : Blah {
if (!instance) {
instance = new Blah( new SingletonEnforcer() );
}
return instance;
}
...
}
}
class SingletonEnforcer{}
Note that the SingletonEnforcer class is internal so can only be used by the Blah class (effectively). No-one can directly instantiate the class, they have to go through the getInstance() function.
hope I'm not hitting dead horses here :)
(edit: ahh, I'm just repeating phils link)
Gregors singleton implementation does not protect against invoking the constructor with a null value, as in:
var b:Blah = new Blah(null);
You will still have only 1 instance, but invoking the constructor is still possible with the consequences that follows.
If you absolutely must enforce the singleton, the constructor should make sure that the enforcer parameter isn't null.
public function Blah( enforcer : SingletonEnforcer ) {
if(!enforcer){
throw new Error("whoops!");
}
}
You should also be concerned about ApplicationDomain when loading swf files. External swf files that uses the same definitions, may have multiple singleton instances (1 in each separate applicationdomain) if you do not specify that the swf file must be loaded into the existing applicationdomain.
This means that Blah.getInstance() in AAA.swf is not the same instance as Blah.getinstance() in BBB.swf, if AAA.swf loads BBB.swf without a LoaderContext instance that tells the plugin to load BBB.swf into the same ApplicationDomain as AAA.swf
First you can reference a previous question to find out how to create a singleton class. You can find more info from a Yakov Fain presentation as well.
Second question, your project can technology have as may singleton class as you see fit but it will only create 1 instance of each. For example, in the cairngorm architecture you have 3 main singletons: controller, service and model. The number of actual class can very depending on your project.
Finally, A real world solutions would be. You have 2 components that need to talk to each other but you don't want them to know the other exists. Meaning sometimes the components are there and sometimes they are not...so you need them to be loosely coupled. you can uses singletons to pass the data from one component to the other with out "talking" to them directly.
Using singletons is a good approach if you need to pass data around your application from component to component and would like to decouple them from each other.
package com.foo.bar
{
public class MySingleton
{
private static var _instance:MySingleton = new MySingleton;
private var _myName:String;
public static function get instance():MySingleton
{
return _instance;
}
public function set myName(value:String):void
{
_myName = value;
}
public function get myName():String
{
return _myName;
}
}
}
Notice the absence of a constructor here.
Hello you could check out the following of a Flex Singleton Class example on http://www.how-to-code.com/flex/flex-design-patterns/flex-singleton-class.html