How can I write the two lines of code below into one line of code:
$service_review->user_id=\Auth::user();
$user_service->service_reviews()->save($service_review);
The reason being that the line including Auth::user() is throwing an error since it's a foreign key in my "service_reviews" table and so "DOESN'T HAVE A DEFAULT VALUE"
The problem is if I give precedence to:
\Auth::user()->service_reviews()->save($service_review);
Then in this case, the authorized user is fetched but my user_service_id now throws the error as "DOESN'T HAVE A DEFAULT VALUE".
The code of my store method (This is from my ReviewsController that is based on a Nested Route:
Route::resource("services.reviews", "ReviewsController"); is as follows:
public function store(ReviewsRequest $request, $id){
$service_review = new Service_review($request->all());
$user_service = User_service::findOrFail($id);
$service_review->user_id=\Auth::user();
$user_service->service_reviews()->save($service_review);
return redirect("reviews");
I reckon passing them in one line of code will solve this error.
Yes your're right #MinaAbadir
I ended up doing it as follows:
public function store(ReviewsRequest $request, $id){
$service_review = new Service_review($request->all());
$user_service = User_service::findOrFail($id);
$service_review->user_id = \Auth::user()->email;
$user_service->service_reviews()->save($service_review);
return redirect("reviews");
}
It seems calling the specific column you want retrieved negates the foreign key problem. Maybe MySQL figures out the relationship via Eloquent. Let me know if I can clean this up further.
Related
Following this tutorial and putting in all together to make it work in my project, just to display a nested list (using doctrine 2 and zf2) , I can not enter into the foreach. Using this snippet of code:
$root_categories = $em->getRepository('Controleitor\Model\Entity\Category')->findBy(array('parent_category' => null));
$collection = new \Doctrine\Common\Collections\ArrayCollection($root_categories);
$category_iterator = new \MYMODULE\Model\Entity\RecursiveCategoryIterator($collection);
$recursive_iterator = new \RecursiveIteratorIterator( $category_iterator, \RecursiveIteratorIterator::SELF_FIRST);
foreach ($recursive_iterator as $index => $child_category){
echo 'test';
}
Debug::dump($recursive_iterator);die;
I'm expecting to print the 'test' string but it only print this:
object(RecursiveIteratorIterator)#414 (0) {}
But when I do before the dump:
$recursive_iterator->current()->getTitle();
I got the title.. It fails somehow looping the \Doctrine\Common\Collections\ArrayCollection object.
If you're using different Debug class instead of Doctrine's one, that may the suspect. Try Doctrine\Common\Util\Debug::dump().
Explain comes from official documentation:
Lazy load proxies always contain an instance of Doctrine’s
EntityManager and all its dependencies. Therefore a var_dump() will
possibly dump a very large recursive structure which is impossible to
render and read. You have to use Doctrine\Common\Util\Debug::dump() to
restrict the dumping to a human readable level. Additionally you
should be aware that dumping the EntityManager to a Browser may take
several minutes, and the Debug::dump() method just ignores any
occurrences of it in Proxy instances.
I had the same issue. I've discussed with the author of this tutorial, he recommended me to check the valid() function of the RecursiveCategoryIterator class and there was the problem.
Since I was using "use" statetment and left a backslash before th class name:
use Entity\Category;
use Doctrine\Common\Collections\Collection;
class RecursiveCategoryIterator implements \RecursiveIterator
{
//.......
public function valid()
{
return $this->posts->current() instanceof \Category;
}
There ware two ways to solve this problem:
1. To remove the backslash:
return $this->posts->current() instanceof Category;
2. To use full namespace:
use Entity\Category; // remove this line
//.......
return $this->posts->current() instanceof \Entity\Category;
Hope that helps.
I have a unit test that I am writing and have run into an annoying problem... Let's say I have the following function I am testing:
public function functionToTest(array &$data, parameter2)
{
// perform some action on the array that is being passed in by reference
}
Now, when I attempt to call this function in my unit test, I would do something like this:
public function testMyFunction()
{
$data = array('key1' => 'val1');
$mockOfClass = $this->getMockBuilder('ClassName')
->disableOriginalConstructor()
->setMethods(array('method1', 'method2')) // My function to test is NOT in this list
->getMock();
$this->mockOfClass->functionToTest($data, true);
// Perform assertions here
}
However, I receive the following error message:
Parameter 1 to ClassName::addNewFriendsToProfile() expected to be a reference, value given
This seemed very strange to me. First of all, I'm just passing an array by reference, so it it shouldn't have a problem with this. Secondly, Why parameter 1? Doesn't it mean parameter 0? Then, I tried changing the call to the following:
$this->mockOfClass->functionToTest(&$data, true);
After making this change, it works fine. Unfortunately, it also produces the following warning:
Call-time pass-by-reference has been deprecated in /PathToFile on line xxx
I do not encounter this error when running the actual code. It only throws this error in the unit test. Also, I need to use the mock as there are methods in the class I am mocking; So I can't simply create a new instance of the class and call the method that is being tested. Is there any way I can get around this?
It turns out that PHPUnit clones each of the parameters that are being passed in (Thanks Tim Lytle for pointing me to this source: Pass by reference in a callback when mocking in PHPUnit). This is what causes the error if the array is passed in without a reference at call-time in the unit test. Luckily, the solution is simple. Instead of passing the array by reference, I pass in the array by value and return the array.
before:
public function someFunction(array &$myArray)
{
$myArray[] = 'new val';
}
after:
public function someFunction(array $myArray)
{
$myArray[] = 'new val';
return $myArray;
}
A Grails controller received is called with the following request parameters:
defaultPrice[0].amount 22
defaultPrice[0].currency 1
defaultPrice[0].id
defaultPrice[1].amount 33
defaultPrice[1].currency 3
defaultPrice[1].id
I've defined the following command class:
class PriceCommand {
BigDecimal amount
Integer currency
Integer id
}
I attempt to bind the request parameters to a `List' in the action
def save = {List<PriceCommand> defaultPrice ->
}
But within the action, defaultPrice is null.
It requires an command with existing list of data, with specified name, that will be filled with data from request.
Try
import org.apache.commons.collections.ListUtils
import org.apache.commons.collections.Factory
class PriceListCommand {
List<PriceCommand> defaultPrice = ListUtils.lazyList([], {new PriceCommand()} as Factory)
}
and use this command inside controller. It should works
I'm not sure if this is what your looking but it may help...
1.) I think indexed params only work if you have a parent-child or one-to-many relationship. For example you might need to introduce a PriceCommandParent which contains a list of PriceCommand. I may be wrong on this and I welcome any corrections.
2.) I've found that indexed params aren't as magically as some of the other areas of Grails/Groovy so sometimes i'd rather deal with the mapping myself. Below is how i've handled it in the past....
def things = []
params.each{name, value->
if (name.matches('^(thing\\[\\d+\\])$')){ //<-- look for 'thing[x]'
things.add(new Thing(params[name]);
}
}
Let me know if any of this is of help
While working with Hibernate Validator, I noticed that the #NotEmpty and #NotNull annotations produce duplicate messages in the InvalidValue array returned by getInvalidValues(...).
If I specify a message like #NotEmpty(message = "My error message."), then I'll get one InvalidValue of "My error message." and a second of "may not be null or empty"
If i don't include a message (eg #NotEmpty by itself), then I get two copies of the InvalidValue with a message field of "may not be null or empty".
Why does Hibernate Validator do this?? Shouldn't I get one message, either the value that I override using the parameter, or the default message, but not both??
For some more context:
I am extending ClassValidator<T> with my own ClassValidator<MyClass> implementation. I do so to add some custom validations which cannot be done by annotation. I need to see the run time value of more than one property of the class in order to determine the validation.
I get the validations when I call myClassValidator.getInvalidValues(), which I override. Inside my implementation of getInvalidValues() I call super.getInvalidValues() to create the initial error list, and then I add my custom errors to that list. In any case, the call to super.getInvalidValues() contains the duplicate messages, one matching the message property passed into the annotation, and a second with the stock value of the annotation message.
Justin,
I've been working with Hibernate Validator for the last couple of months. While I have not run into the same issue that you've described, I also have not extended ClassValidator. For custom validation, the Hibernate Reference Guide indicates that writing custom constraints is the way to go.
I have been able to use the built-in constraints almost exclusively on my current project. In one case, where I needed to do some very specific calculations on an integer field, I wrote a custom constraint as described in the reference guide; it was a breeze.
Speaking to your specific problem, I wrote a simple test app as a sort of sanity check on my part:
import org.hibernate.validator.*;
public class HibernateValidatorTest {
#NotEmpty
#NotNull
private String validateMe;
public static void main ( String[] args ) {
ClassValidator<HibernateValidatorTest> validator =
new ClassValidator<HibernateValidatorTest>( HibernateValidatorTest.class );
InvalidValue[] inVals =
validator.getInvalidValues( new HibernateValidatorTest() );
for ( InvalidValue inVal : inVals ) {
System.out.println( inVal.getMessage() );
}
}
}
With both Hibernate constraints on the validateMe field, the console output is:
may not be null or empty
may not be null
Removing one or the other has the expected effect of printing only a single message to the console.
I hope this is helpful.
Brian T. Grant
I have a list of error codes I need to reference, kinda like this:
Code / Error Message
A01 = whatever error
U01 = another error
U02 = yet another error type
I get the Code returned to me via a web service call and I need to display or get the readable error. So I need a function when passed a Code that returns the readable description. I was just going to do a select case but thought their might be a better way. What is the best way / most effieient way to do this?
Use a Dictionary, (in C#, but the concept and classes are the same):
// Initialize this once, and store it in the ASP.NET Cache.
Dictionary<String,String> errorCodes = new Dictionary<String,String>();
errorCodes.Add("A01", "Whatever Error");
errorCodes.Add("U01", "Another Error");
// And to get your error code:
string ErrCode = errorCodes[ErrorCodeFromWS];
You would use a dictionary. A dictionary uses a hashmap internally for performance, so it is good in that regard. Also, because you want this to go as quickly as possible by the sounds of it, I would statically initialize it in its own class instead of, for example, in an XML file or slimier. You would probably want something like:
public static class ErrorCodes
{
private static Dictonary<string, string> s_codes = new Dicontary<string, string>();
static ErrorCodes()
{
s_codes["code"] = "Description";
s_codes["code2"] = "Description2";
}
public static string GetDesc(string code)
{
return s_codes[code];
}
}
That way, if you wanted to move the back end to a file instead of being static, then you could.