In one vein of thought I would like to configure a build with a custom task that will serve instead of the test default task. I will not be registering it as an "sbt test framework" as I'd like to avoid the syntax, limitations and history that comes with that. For example I'd like more flexibility in formatting, storing and sending test results.
Would it be possible introducing an sbt task to mimic sbt's default test task, in the following essential senses:
depend on compilation
be a dependency for other tasks such as artifact publishing tasks, and have them depend on a success return value from it
be able to provide it with library dependencies which will be excluded from final publishable artifacts
be able to control it just like any other task dependency
etc
Alternatively, are you able to delineate the structure of the mostly undocumented sbt TestFramework interface to a level that it's straightforward having your own formatting, test output logic, and test results publishing code, in your TestFramework implementation? I have mostly failed locating scalaTest's implementation of it.
Thanks in advance for you answers on both techniques.
Related
Full Error:
transactions.TransactionBuilder. - The transaction currently built is missing an attachment for class: com/gibtn/corda/printutilities/PrintLedgerTransaction. Attempted to find a suitable attachment but could not find any in the storage.
This has been asked here and here but I hope to get better clarification.
Problem:
I have built a set of libraries to perform common tasks in my Flows that I include in all my CorDapps. For now I just copy the JARs into each project, make some changes to the gradle files and everything works great.
I recently put together a small library for performing common tasks in Contracts and added the JAR the same way.
This works fine with MockNodes. But when I test with real nodes I will get this error in the CRaSH shell and the transaction will fail with a NoClassDefFoundError exception.
Question:
Is what I am doing even possible? Or do I always have to keep my utility classes inside the Contracts module in IntelliJ so they are bundled together with the Contracts into a single JAR? That way when the node starts the JAR (containing the Contracts and any utilities) is added to Attachment storage as a single Attachment.
I found a way to solve this. It's a bit dirty but initial testing seems to work. I just created a blank class in my utilities JAR that implements Contract. It's verify() method is empty. Now when the Corda node starts it sees this Contract and adds the JAR to Attachment storage. So from the CRaSH shell if I run:
attachments trustInfo
...my utility JAR will be listed (it wasn't before). I see when I use one of the utility methods in a Contract the utility JAR will be included as a separate Attachment in the WireTransaction.
I'm not crazy about this solution and will probably stop using a utility JAR for Contracts. I'll go back to copying the classes into each project. Nevertheless there is a way to do it. I would just need a more experienced Corda developer to give it their blessing before I'd go forward into production with it.
My purpose is to write all compile warnings and errors to a file, that will be shown as a report file in Jenkins.
In this way, it is more clear to see the output of many tasks running in parallel.
How can I accomplish this with the compile task?
UPDATE:
I've researched a little and found:
compilerReporter, but is is declared as private. So it cannot be used.
bspReporter task, that I don't know how to override
The clue is to use the compilerReporter task.
As this task is defined as private[sbt], the only choice is to create within the project an AutoPlugin in the sbt package.
This plugin will be responsible of overriding the default value of the task, and will have no problems as it is in the same package.
More info here: https://github.com/sbt/sbt/pull/5948
I recently created a Meteor package and want to write some tests. What my test package basically do is that users can insert into the template {{> abc}} and they'll get an HTML element printed on the page.
With TinyTest, all you can do is test the package's API using something like test.equal(actual, expected, message, not). However, I need it to test whether the element was successfully printed on the page. Furthermore, I will pass the template some parameters and test them too.
It seems like I'd have to create a dummy app, run bash to initiate the app, and test whether the elements can be found on page. So should I only use TinyTest to test the API, and write my own tests (somehow!) for templating? If not, how should I go about it?
I read something about Blaze.toHTML, but I cannot find anything in the documentation on it? Nor it's source page.
I think TinyTest is great for starting with Unit testing, but what you need sounds more like an Integration test.
I would recommend you look into the following links for more info on testing with Meteor, especially with Velocity - Meteor's official testing framework:
Announcing Velocity: the official testing framework for Meteor applications
Velocity
The Meteor Testing Manual
You can create a demo application, and run integration tests using Mocha or Jasmine.
I need to be able to perform all of the available functions that the Package Manager Console performs for code first DB migrations. Does anyone know how I could accomplish these commands strictly through user defined code? I am trying to automate this whole migration process and my team has hit the dreaded issue of getting the migrations out of sync due to the number of developers on this project. I want to write a project that the developer can interact with that will create and if need be rescaffold their migrations for them automatically.
PM is invoking through PowerShell and PS cmdlets (like for active directory etc.)
http://docs.nuget.org/docs/reference/package-manager-console-powershell-reference
The Package Manager Console is a PowerShell console within Visual
Studio
...there is essentially very little info about this - I've tried that before on couple occasions and it gets down to doing some 'dirty work' if you really need it (not really sure, it might not be that difficult - providing you have some PS experience)
Here are similar questions / answers - working out the PS comdlets is pretty involving - in this case it has some additional steps involved. And PS tends to get very version dependent - so you need to check this for the specific EF/CF you're using.
Run entityframework cmdlets from my code
Possible to add migration using EF DbMigrator
And you may want to look at the source code for EF that does Add-Migration
(correction: this is the link to official repository - thanks to #Brice for that)
http://entityframework.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/f986cb32d0a3#src/EntityFramework.PowerShell/Migrations/AddMigrationCommand.cs
http://entityframework.codeplex.com/SourceControl/BrowseLatest
(PM errors also suggest the origins of the code doing the Add-Migrations to be the 'System.Data.Entity.Migrations.Design.ToolingFacade')
If you need 'just' an Update - you could try using the DbMigrator.Update (this guy gave it a try http://joshmouch.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/entity-framework-code-first-migrations-executing-migrations-using-code-not-powershell-commands/) - but I'm not sure how relevant is that to you, I doubt it.
The scaffolding is the real problem (Add-Migration) which to my knowledge isn't accessible from C# directly via EF/CF framework.
Note: - based on the code in (http://entityframework.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/f986cb32d0a3#src/EntityFramework.PowerShell/Migrations/AddMigrationCommand.cs) - and as the EF guru mentioned himself - that part of the code is calling into the System.Data.Entity.Migrations.Design library - which does most of the stuff. If it's possible to reference that one and actually repeat what AddMigrationCommand is doing - then there might not be a need for PowerShell at all. But I'm suspecting it's not that straight-forward, with possible 'internal' calls invisible to outside callers etc.
At least as of this post, you can directly access the System.Data.Entity.Migrations.Design.MigrationScaffolder class and directly call the Scaffold() methods on it, which will return you an object that contains the contents of the "regular" .cs file, the "Designer.cs" file and the .resx file.
What you do with those files is up to you!
Personally, I'm attempting to turn this into a tool that will be able to create EF6 migrations on a new ASPNET5/DNX project, which is not supported by the powershell commands.
What method do you use to get a compile time error when the database schema changes occur in an ASP.NET project?
For example, if you have a GridView bound to a DataSource, I can only get runtime errors when a schema change occurs, not a compile time error. Intellisense works fine on the code behind using datasets, LINQ, etc, but I cant seem to get a compile time error on an ASP.NET page when I change the schema.
Any advice?
Create a unit test that verifies the correctness of you data access layer, and make sure it covers all your DB-related code. Not everything can be caught at compile time...
One way I can think of easily achieving this behavior would be to databind to a dynamic DAL. There are some tools that can help do this DAL generation, I'd recommend taking a look at SubSonic.
Once you have something like SubSonic in place you can bind to the resulting business objects. These business objects will automatically change in the case of a schema change in the database and this will break your binding code which will result in a compile time error.
Update
Assaf's recommendation to use Unit Tests is also a good idea. It doesn't solve your stated problem but it is definitely something that should be in place and is a great tool for flagging these type of problems.
We use a modest system (xml to c++) to create schemas from an independent description, this system also creates names for tables and columns that we use inside the code, when there is a change in the schema the names change, as the names we originally used are not there anymore and the compiler will flag an error.
You could probably configure a lot of the DAO generation tools to do something similar.
One solution would be to version your database and map an application build to a specific version (maybe in a properties file). In the entry point of your app, you can compare the expected version to the actual version and handle the error accordingly.
I'm not sure whats the equivalent in ASP.net of Migrations in Rails or dbdeploy in Java for versioning your database. But any DB versioning tool that makes schema changes incremental and versioned and tracks the version in a Version table will suit the purpose.
But if you want a compile time error while building your app, you might as well upgrade your schema to the latest version as part of your build process, avoiding the possibility of schema changes in the first place.