how to spec createQueryBuilder() in controller - symfony

I'm writing phpspec test for controller
In action I am calling another method with this:
$this->getDoctrine()->getManager()->createQueryBuilder();
I cannot pass this in phpspec.
What I'm getting is
method Double\ObjectManager\P7::createQueryBuilder() is not defined
Have you got any suggestion how to spec it?

If you can't spec something, it's a indicator you have a bad design. In your case you should never create query builders in your controllers. Controller should be only a clue between different services.
For doctrine queries create repositories!

Related

How to test internal controllers without route in Symfony 2

I am trying to reduce redundant code by refactoring template and controller code into reusable components, which I then use via the render(controller('AppBundle:Foo/Bar:baz')) construct inside my other templates.
Of course I would like to test these components. In the examples regarding functional testing, however, an actual route is required to make fake test requests. But my BarController here is purely internal and has no routes attached to it. How can I test this controller?
Creating dummy routes is not always possible, because some of the arguments are model objects that cannot be passed via URL. Am I approaching this the wrong way?
The service approach sounds nice, but I am simply doing this now:
self::$kernel->getContainer()->get('router')->getContext()->setParameter('_locale', 'en');
$controller = new MyController();
$controller->setContainer(self::$kernel->getContainer());
$response = $controller->myAction($arg1, $arg2, $argWhatever);
// assertions here
Seems to work just fine.
If the controllers are setup as services, then they can be easily tested much as any other class would be unit-tested. Even before Symfony 3.3 started to make them services by default, I had altered some of my own to allow them to be more easily tested like this.

Symfony2: Best way for logging from anywhere

I am working on my first Symfony project. I wonder what is the best / recommendet method to write log messages from anywhere in my code.
So far I used Monolog which works great when being used in a controller:
public function indexAction() {
$logger = $this->get('logger');
$logger->info('I just got the logger');
$logger->error('An error occurred');
// ...
}
But how can I use this code from any classe/code from my project? Doctrine entity classes for example cannot use $this->get('logger') to create the logger. How can I access the service in these classes? Or what other methode to log message is recommended in these cases?
EDIT: Of course I could create the logger in any controller and pass it down to all other classes. But this would be quite very cumbersome. There has to be a better way.
IMO, a first approach could be the creation of Event Listeners for specific actions in order to log only what you have decided to.
Have a look to this chapter : http://symfony.com/doc/current/cookbook/event_dispatcher/event_listener.html
Hope it will help you.

Is there an ASP MVC Equivalent for PHP's require_once()?

I'm wondering if there is an ASP.Net MVC equivalent to PHP's require_once() function.
Lets say I need to call RenderAction to a particular action twice. However, inside the view that is rendered from said action, I need to print out some init scripts but only once.
Is there an easy mechanism to do this?
Should a flag be set in the controller and then passed into the view?
Thanks for any help you can provide.
Edit
Thanks for the responses. I know I can do this through the controller or temp data or some mechanism like that but wasn't sure if there was anything built into .NET MVC that would have done this for me automatically.
I am not aware of such equivalent.
Should a flag be set in the controller and then passed into the view?
That seems like a good way. The flag needs to be passed as argument to the controller action when using the RenderAction helper.

Asp.net MVC RouteBase and IoC

I am creating a custom route by subclassing RouteBase. I have a dependency in there that I'd like to wire up with IoC. The method GetRouteData just takes HttpContext, but I want to add in my unit of work as well....somehow.
I am using StructureMap, but info on how you would do this with any IoC framework would be helpful.
Well, here is our solution. Many little details may be omitted but overall idea is here. This answer may be a kind of offtop to original question but it describes the general solution to the problem.
I'll try to explain the part that is responsible for plain custom HTML-pages that are created by users at runtime and therefore can't have their own Controller/Action. So the routes should be either somehow built at runtime or be "catch-all" with custom IRouteConstraint.
First of all, lets state some facts and requirements.
We have some data and some metadata about our pages stored in DB;
We don't want to generate a (hypothetically) whole million of routes for all of existing pages beforehand (i.e. on Application startup) because something can change during application and we don't want to tackle with pushing the changes to global RouteCollection;
So we do it this way:
1. PageController
Yes, special controller that is responsible for all our content pages. And there is the only action that is Display(int id) (actually we have a special ViewModel as param but I used an int id for simplicity.
The page with all its data is resolved by ID inside that Display() method. The method itself returns either ViewResult (strongly typed after PageViewModel) or NotFoundResult in case when page is not found.
2. Custom IRouteConstraint
We have to somewhere define if the URL user actually requested refers to one of our custom pages. For this we have a special IsPageConstraint that implements IRouteConstraint interface. In the Match() method of our constraint we just call our PageRepository to check whether there is a page that match our requested URL. We have our PageRepository injected by StructureMap. If we find the page then we add that "id" parameter (with the value) to the RouteData dictionary and it is automatically bound to PageController.Display(int id) by DefaultModelBinder.
But we need a RouteData parameter to check. Where we get that? Here comes...
3. Route mapping with "catch-all" parameter
Important note: this route is defined in the very end of route mappings list because it is very general, not specific. We check all our explicitly defined routes first and then check for a Page (that is easily changeable if needed).
We simply map our route like this:
routes.MapRoute("ContentPages",
"{*pagePath}",
new { controller = "Page", action = "Display" }
new { pagePath = new DependencyRouteConstraint<IsPageConstraint>() });
Stop! What is that DependencyRouteConstraint thing appeared in mapping? Well, thats what does the trick.
4. DependencyRouteConstraint<TConstraint> class
This is just another generic implementation of IRouteConstraint which takes the "real" IRouteConstraint (IsPageConstraint) and resolves it (the given TConstraint) only when Match() method called. It uses dependency injection so our IsPageConstraint instance has all actual dependencies injected!
Our DependencyRouteConstraint then just calls the dependentConstraint.Match() providing all the parameters thus just delegating actual "matching" to the "real" IRouteConstraint.
Note: this class actually has the dependency on ServiceLocator.
Summary
That way we have:
Our Route clear and clean;
The only class that has a dependency on Service Locator is DependencyRouteConstraint;
Any custom IRouteConstraint uses dependency injection whenever needed;
???
PROFIT!
Hope this helps.
So, the problem is:
Route must be defined beforehand, during Application startup
Route's responsibility is to map the incoming URL pattern to the right Controller/Action to perform some task on request. And visa versa - to generate links using that mapping data. Period. Everything else is "Single Responsibility Principle" violation which actually led to your problem.
But UoW dependencies (like NHibernate ISession, or EF ObjectContext) must be resolved at runtime.
And that is why I don't see the children of RouteBase class as a good place for some DB work dependency. It makes everything closely coupled and non-scalable. It is actually impossible to perform Dependency Injection.
From now (I guess there is some kind of already working system) you actually have just one more or less viable option that is:
To use Service Locator pattern: resolve your UoW instance right inside the GetRouteData method (use CommonServiceLocator backed by StructureMap IContainer). That is simple but not really nice thing because this way you get the dependency on static Service Locator itself in your Route.
With CSL you have to just call inside GetRouteData:
var uow = ServiceLocator.Current.GetService<IUnitOfWork>();
or with just StructureMap (without CSL facade):
var uow = ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IUnitOfWork>();
and you're done. Quick and dirty. And the keyword is "dirty" actually :)
Sure, there is much more flexible solution but it needs a few architectural changes. If you provide more details on exactly what data you get in your routes I can try to explain how we solved our Pages routing problem (using DI and custom IRouteConstraint).

Should I use the DotNetOpenAuth OpenIdRelyingParty RedirectingResponse.AsActionResult or RedirectToProvider in MVC?

I've implemented an OpenID controller using Dnoa. I was using the approach found in the RP MVC template for dnoa, which returns IAuthenticationRequest.RedirectingResponse.AsActionResult() from the controller action. However, I've now found the controller very difficult to test using Moq because of this method.
I changed the controller to instead invoke IAuthenticationRequest.RedirectToProvider() and return null for the ActionResult, which seems to have the same effect. RedirectToProvider should be easier to mock, but is it appropriate to return null from the controller in this case?
The AsActionResult method is meant for MVC, obviously. I would encourage you to use it.
Can you tell me why it's difficult to test?

Resources