With JavaFx WebView, I can get the 'window' of a browser instance[1] with:
// Java code
netscape.javascript.JSObject win = (JSObject) webengine.executeScript("window");
Then I can pass this JSObject to another browser instance[2], and in this browser's javascript, I can manipulate and access DOM, variables and functions of the first browser instance[1] like this:
// Javascript code
// get 'window' netscape.javascript.JSObject of 'browser1' webview
// control from the getWindow() method in my linked Java class
var window1 = javaObj.getWindow("browser1");
// get variables defined in 'browser1' javascript
var rString = window1.myString;
var rNum = window1.myNumber;
// execute the 'myAlert' function on 'browser1' and pass variables in
window1.myAlert(rString + " - " + rNum + "<br><br>" + Date());
// manipulate the DOM on 'browser1'
window1.document.getElementById("myLabel").style.backgroundColor = "red";
How can I achieve this with jxBrowser?
JxBrowser provides similar functionality that allows injecting Java objects into JavaScript and call its methods from JavaScript code, but JxBrowser doesn't use the netscape.javascript.JSObject class. The following example demonstrates the idea how to use the Java object injection to access Java object methods from JavaScript:
import com.teamdev.jxbrowser.chromium.Browser;
import com.teamdev.jxbrowser.chromium.JSValue;
import com.teamdev.jxbrowser.chromium.dom.By;
import com.teamdev.jxbrowser.chromium.dom.DOMDocument;
import com.teamdev.jxbrowser.chromium.dom.DOMElement;
public class JavaScriptJavaSample {
public static void main(String[] args) {
Browser browser = new Browser();
JSValue window = browser.executeJavaScriptAndReturnValue("window");
// Inject Java object into JavaScript and associate it with
// the window.javaWindow property.
JavaWindow javaWindow = new JavaWindow(browser);
window.asObject().setProperty("javaWindow", javaWindow);
// You can access public fields of the injected Java object
// and modify their values from JavaScript. For example:
//
// window.javaWindow.myString = 'Hello, Java';
// window.javaWindow.myNumber = 123;
// window.document().getElementById('myLabel').setAttribute('name', 'myName');
}
public static class JavaDocument {
private DOMDocument document;
public JavaDocument(DOMDocument document) {
this.document = document;
}
public DOMElement getElementById(String id) {
return document.findElement(By.id(id));
}
}
public static class JavaWindow {
public String myString;
public int myNumber;
private Browser browser;
public JavaWindow(Browser browser) {
this.browser = browser;
}
public JavaDocument document() {
return new JavaDocument(browser.getDocument());
}
}
}
You can read more about JavaScript-Java Bridge API in the articles at https://jxbrowser.support.teamdev.com/support/solutions/folders/9000074803
Related
in a #WASM / #UNO-platform project, how do you hand over files to the user?
In my case I’m generation locally a PDF and had to download it or display it in the browser.
Any clue?
Regards,
Michael
There's no API to do that directly, yet. But you can create a data: url on an anchor (a) HTML element.
For this you'll need to create some JavaScript. Here's how you can do it:
IMPORTANT: following code will only work with very recent version of Uno.UI. Version starting with v3.0.0-dev.949+
Create a ContentControl for the <a> tag
[HtmlElement("a")]
public partial class WasmDownload : ContentControl
{
public static readonly DependencyProperty MimeTypeProperty = DependencyProperty.Register(
"MimeType", typeof(string), typeof(WasmDownload), new PropertyMetadata("application/octet-stream", OnChanged));
public string MimeType
{
get => (string) GetValue(MimeTypeProperty);
set => SetValue(MimeTypeProperty, value);
}
public static readonly DependencyProperty FileNameProperty = DependencyProperty.Register(
"FileName", typeof(string), typeof(WasmDownload), new PropertyMetadata("filename.bin", OnChanged));
public string FileName
{
get => (string) GetValue(FileNameProperty);
set => SetValue(FileNameProperty, value);
}
private Memory<byte> _content;
public void SetContent(Memory<byte> content)
{
_content = content;
Update();
}
private static void OnChanged(DependencyObject dependencyobject, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs args)
{
if (dependencyobject is WasmDownload wd)
{
wd.Update();
}
}
private void Update()
{
if (_content.Length == 0)
{
this.ClearHtmlAttribute("href");
}
else
{
var base64 = Convert.ToBase64String(_content.ToArray());
var dataUrl = $"data:{MimeType};base64,{base64}";
this.SetHtmlAttribute("href", dataUrl);
this.SetHtmlAttribute("download", FileName);
}
}
}
Use it in Your XAML Page
<myControls:WasmDownload FileName="test.txt" x:Name="download">
Click here to download
</myControls:WasmDownload>
Note you can put anything in the content of your control, as any other XAML ContentControl.
Set the File Content in Code Behind
Loaded += (sender, e) =>
{
download.MimeType = "text/plain";
var bytes = Encoding.UTF8.GetBytes("this is the content");
download.SetContent(bytes);
};
Result
Direct support by Uno
There is a PR #3380 to add this feature to Uno natively for all platforms. You can also wait for it instead of doing custom way.
The PR for FileSavePicker has been merged and the feature is now available in package Uno.UI since version 3.0.0-dev.1353.
I have a problem with mocking cause it keep calling the original function. This is my demo code
First file is interface that contains the function that I want to mock.
public interface IDemoReplace
{
int FunctionToBeReplaced();
}
Second file is a class that actually has the implementation for the function
public class DemoReplace : IDemoReplace
{
public int FunctionToBeReplaced()
{
//this function contains sql query in my real project
return 1;
}
}
Third file is a class that I want to test
public class ClassToBeTested
{
public int TestThisFunction()
{
IDemoReplace replace = new DemoReplace();
var temp = replace.FunctionToBeReplaced();
return temp;
}
}
Last file is the test class
public class TestClass
{
[Fact]
public void TryTest()
{
using (var mock = AutoMock.GetLoose()) {
//Arrange
mock.Mock<IDemoReplace>()
.Setup(x => x.FunctionToBeReplaced())
.Returns(returnTwo());
var classToBeTested = mock.Create<ClassToBeTested>();
var expected = 2;
//Act
var actual = classToBeTested.TestThisFunction();
//Assert
Assert.Equal(expected, actual);
}
}
public int returnTwo() {
return 2;
}
}
This test will be failed with expected is 2 and actual is 1. When I tried to debug it doesn't call returnTwo but call the original function instead.
I am new to unit testing so what did I miss? Please be considered that the code above is only a demo of what is happened in my actual project. FunctionToBeReplaced is actually a function that execute and return record from database so I want to mock that function.
Thanks :)
This is a design issue. The subject under test is tight coupled to implementation concerns that make it difficult to isolation the subject so that it can be unit tested.
It (subject) is manually creating its dependency
IDemoReplace replace = new DemoReplace();
Ideally you want to explicitly inject dependencies. Those dependencies should also be abstractions and not concretions.
public class ClassToBeTested {
private readonly IDemoReplace dependency;
public ClassToBeTested(IDemoReplace dependency) {
this.dependency = dependency;
}
public int TestThisFunction() { ;
var temp = dependency.FunctionToBeReplaced();
return temp;
}
}
At run time, the implementation (or mock) can be injected, either purely, or via a container.
The test in the original example shown should now behave as expected.
public class TestClass {
[Fact]
public void TryTest() {
using (var mock = AutoMock.GetLoose()) {
//Arrange
var expected = returnTwo();
mock.Mock<IDemoReplace>()
.Setup(x => x.FunctionToBeReplaced())
.Returns(expected);
var classToBeTested = mock.Create<ClassToBeTested>();
//Act
var actual = classToBeTested.TestThisFunction();
//Assert
Assert.Equal(expected, actual);
}
}
public int returnTwo() {
return 2;
}
}
Using a map in the proto file of grpc for .net core to send a dictionary as a request parameter makes it private field(read-only) in the auto-generated code. So I am unable to assign the dictionary to map and pass it in the API request. How do I make it read-write.?
Sample proto request:
service xyz{
rpc testTrans(TestRequest) returns (TestResponse);
}
message TestRequest {
map<string,string> props = 1;
}
so the auto-generated code looks like this :
public const int PropsFieldNumber = 1;
private static readonly pbc::MapField<string, string>.Codec _map_Props_codec
= new pbc::MapField<string, string>.Codec(pb::FieldCodec.ForString(10), pb::FieldCodec.ForString(18), 10);
private readonly pbc::MapField<string, string> Props_ = new pbc::MapField<string, string>();
[global::System.Diagnostics.DebuggerNonUserCodeAttribute]
public pbc::MapField<string, string> Props {
get { return Props_; }
}
So now when i try to assign property in request as below, it throws error :
Property or Indexer TestRequest.Props could not be assigned to -- it is read only.
public static void testTrans(Dictionary<string, string> test)
{
var res = client.InitTrans(new TestRequest
{
Props = test
});
}
It seems like there is being prevented when you want to directly declare and initialize the value with:
var res = client.InitTrans(new TestRequest
{
//Property could not be assigned to -- it is read only...error
Props = new Map<string,string>.Add("somekey", "somevalue");
// Alternatively the same problem will also occur when you do
// Props = new Map<string,string>.Add(SomeDict);
}
Instead there should be work around by initializing your variable and then add the value(s) to the dictionary later (after the initialization of the entire message object).
var res = new TestRequest{};
//test is some dictionary
res.TestRequest.Props.Add(test);
//alternatively you can also add with (key, value)
res.TestRequest.Props.Add("someKey", "someValue);
I'm trying to write this simple test:
var fixture = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
var postProcessingAction = fixture.Freeze<Mock<IPostProcessingAction>>();
var postProcessor = fixture.Freeze<PostProcessor>();
postProcessor.Process("", "");
postProcessingAction.Verify(action => action.Do());
The Verify check fails.
The code for postProcessor.Process is
public void Process(string resultFilePath, string jobId)
{
IPostProcessingAction postProcessingAction =
postProcessingActionReader
.CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml(resultFilePath);
postProcessingAction.Do();
}
postProcessingActionReader is an interface field initialized through the constructor.
I'm expecting the test to pass but it fails, it turns out the instance of IPostProessingAction returned from the CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml method is not the same instance as returned from fixture.Freeze<>.
My expectation was that after freezing this Mock object it would inject the underlying mock of the IPostProcessingAction interface in every place its required as well as make all mock methods returning IPostProcessingAction return this same object.
Is my expectation about the return value of the mock methods incorrect?
Is there a way to change this behavior so that mock methods return the same frozen instance?
You need to Freeze the IPostProcessingActionReader component.
The following test will pass:
[Fact]
public void Test()
{
var fixture = new Fixture()
.Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
var postProcessingActionMock = new Mock<IPostProcessingAction>();
var postProcessingActionReaderMock = fixture
.Freeze<Mock<IPostProcessingActionReader>>();
postProcessingActionReaderMock
.Setup(x => x.CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml(
It.IsAny<string>()))
.Returns(postProcessingActionMock.Object);
var postProcessor = fixture.CreateAnonymous<PostProcessor>();
postProcessor.Process("", "");
postProcessingActionMock.Verify(action => action.Do());
}
Assuming that the types are defined as:
public interface IPostProcessingAction
{
void Do();
}
public class PostProcessor
{
private readonly IPostProcessingActionReader actionReader;
public PostProcessor(IPostProcessingActionReader actionReader)
{
if (actionReader == null)
throw new ArgumentNullException("actionReader");
this.actionReader = actionReader;
}
public void Process(string resultFilePath, string jobId)
{
IPostProcessingAction postProcessingAction = this.actionReader
.CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml(resultFilePath);
postProcessingAction.Do();
}
}
public interface IPostProcessingActionReader
{
IPostProcessingAction CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml(
string resultFilePath);
}
In case you use AutoFixture declaratively with the xUnit.net extension the test could be simplified even further:
[Theory, AutoMoqData]
public void Test(
[Frozen]Mock<IPostProcessingActionReader> readerMock,
Mock<IPostProcessingAction> postProcessingActionMock,
PostProcessor postProcessor)
{
readerMock
.Setup(x => x.CreatePostProcessingActionFromJobResultXml(
It.IsAny<string>()))
.Returns(postProcessingActionMock.Object);
postProcessor.Process("", "");
postProcessingActionMock.Verify(action => action.Do());
}
The AutoMoqDataAttribute is defined as:
internal class AutoMoqDataAttribute : AutoDataAttribute
{
internal AutoMoqDataAttribute()
: base(new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization()))
{
}
}
As of 3.20.0, you can use AutoConfiguredMoqCustomization. This will automatically configure all mocks so that their members' return values are generated by AutoFixture.
In other words, it will auto-configure your postProcessingActionReader to return the frozen postProcessingAction.
Just change this:
var fixture = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoMoqCustomization());
to this:
var fixture = new Fixture().Customize(new AutoConfiguredMoqCustomization());
If I click on a button of my Silverlight app, another third-party web app must gets some data.
My experience, until now, has been to create web service functions that you can call when you need, but in this case I have to give the possibility to the customer to "handle the click event on the button". In the actual case the third-party app is ASP.Net, but, if it were possible, I would like to do something portable.
Before to start with some crazy idea that will comes in my mind, I would ask: How would you do that?
Pileggi
I Use This Class To Create And Post a Form Dynamically
public class PassData
{
public static PassData Default = new PassData();
public void Send(string strUrl, Dictionary<string, object> Parameters, string ContainerClientID = "divContainer")
{
var obj = HtmlPage.Document.GetElementById(ContainerClientID);
if (obj != null)
{
HtmlElement divContainer = obj as HtmlElement;
ClearContent((HtmlElement)divContainer);
HtmlElement form = HtmlPage.Document.CreateElement("form");
form.SetAttribute("id", "frmPostData");
form.SetAttribute("name", "frmPostData");
form.SetAttribute("target", "_blank");
form.SetAttribute("method", "POST");
form.SetAttribute("action", strUrl);
if (Parameters != null)
foreach (KeyValuePair<string, object> item in Parameters)
{
HtmlElement hidElement = HtmlPage.Document.CreateElement("input");
hidElement.SetAttribute("name", item.Key);
hidElement.SetAttribute("value", item.Value.ToString());
form.AppendChild(hidElement);
}
divContainer.AppendChild(form);
form.Invoke("submit");
ClearContent((HtmlElement)divContainer);
}
}
private void ClearContent(System.Windows.Browser.HtmlElement obj)
{
foreach (HtmlElement item in obj.Children)
{
obj.RemoveChild(item);
}
}
}
divContainer is id of a div in html