I am trying to find a way to override a structuremap registry statement containing EnrichWith like so (here is the Registry class):
public class MyRegistry : Registry
{
public MyRegistry()
{
For(typeof(IMyList<int>)).EnrichWith(x => DecorateMyList(x)).Use(typeof(MyListA<int>));
For(typeof(IMyList<int>)).Use(typeof(MyListB<int>));
For<IMyList<string>>().Use<MyListA<string>>();
For<IMyList<string>>().Use<MyListB<string>>();
}
private object DecorateMyList(object o)
{
var genericParameters = o.GetType().GetGenericArguments();
var myListDecoratorType = typeof(MyListDecorator<>).MakeGenericType(genericParameters);
var decorated = Activator.CreateInstance(myListDecoratorType, new []{o});
return decorated;
}
}
public class MyRegistryUser
{
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IMyList<string>>(); // Good: Returns an instance of MyListB<string> as expected
ObjectFactory.GetInstance<IMyList<int>>(); // Bad: Returns an instance of the decorator containing MyListB<int> - my second rule should have overridden the EnrichWith as well.
}
Am I right to think that there is a glitch in structure map or is there something I'm not seeing?
Thanks in advance
Related
I'd like to make wrapper to implement simple data binding pattern -- while some data have been modified all registered handlers are got notified. I have started with this (for js target):
class Main {
public static function main() {
var target = new Some();
var binding = new Bindable(target);
binding.one = 5;
// binding.two = 0.12; // intentionally unset field
binding.three = []; // wrong type
binding.four = 'str'; // no such field in wrapped class
trace(binding.one, binding.two, binding.three, binding.four, binding.five);
// outputs: 5, null, [], str, null
trace(target.one, target.two, target.three);
// outputs: 5, null, []
}
}
class Some {
public var one:Int;
public var two:Float;
public var three:Bool;
public function new() {}
}
abstract Bindable<TClass>(TClass) {
public inline function new(source) { this = source; }
#:op(a.b) public function setField<T>(name:String, value:T) {
Reflect.setField(this, name, value);
// TODO notify handlers
return value;
}
#:op(a.b) public function getField<T>(name:String):T {
return cast Reflect.field(this, name);
}
}
So I have some frustrating issues: interface of wrapped object doesn't expose to wrapper, so there's no auto completion or strict type checking, some necessary attributes can be easily omitted or even misspelled.
Is it possible to fix my solution or should I better move to the macros?
I almost suggested here to open an issue regarding this problem. Because some time ago, there was a #:followWithAbstracts meta available for abstracts, which could be (or maybe was?) used to forward fields and call #:op(a.b) at the same time. But that's not really necessary, Haxe is powerful enough already.
abstract Binding<TClass>(TClass) {
public function new(source:TClass) { this = source; }
#:op(a.b) public function setField<T>(name:String, value:T) {
Reflect.setField(this, name, value);
// TODO notify handlers
trace("set: $name -> $value");
return value;
}
#:op(a.b) public function getField<T>(name:String):T {
trace("get: $name");
return cast Reflect.field(this, name);
}
}
#:forward
#:multiType
abstract Bindable<TClass>(TClass) {
public function new(source:TClass);
#:to function to(t:TClass) return new Binding(t);
}
We use here multiType abstract to forward fields, but resolved type is actually regular abstract. In effect, you have completion working and #:op(a.b) called at the same time.
You need #:forward meta on your abstract. However, this will not make auto-completion working unless you remove #:op(A.B) because it shadows forwarded fields.
EDIT: it seems that shadowing happened first time I added #:forward to your abstract, afterwards auto-completion worked just fine.
Eclipselink 2.6.3 with JPA 2.0
I have an issue with SINGLE_TABLE inheritance strategy as you can see I have class A which is extended by Z & X. When I query and fetch List of Z or X entities and try to change something and update them one by one, in the process when I call em.merge() for fetching merged clone object it gives back class A which is strange.
As I already have class extractor which decides what class should be returned based on a specific field value.
This issue is intermittent and can't be replicated every time, I've also debugged in UnitOfWorkImpl method
public Object mergeCloneWithReferences(Object rmiClone, MergeManager manager) {
if (rmiClone == null) {
return null;
}
//this line should always give correct entity back.. but doesnt happen why ?
ClassDescriptor descriptor = getDescriptor(rmiClone);
if ((descriptor == null) || descriptor.isDescriptorTypeAggregate()) {
if (manager.getCascadePolicy() == MergeManager.CASCADE_BY_MAPPING){
throw new IllegalArgumentException(ExceptionLocalization.buildMessage("not_an_entity", new Object[]{rmiClone}));
}
return rmiClone;
}
//CR#2272
logDebugMessage(rmiClone, "merge_clone_with_references");
ObjectBuilder builder = descriptor.getObjectBuilder();
Object implementation = builder.unwrapObject(rmiClone, this);
Object mergedObject = manager.mergeChanges(implementation, null, this);
if (isSmartMerge()) {
return builder.wrapObject(mergedObject, this);
} else {
return mergedObject;
}
}
Can someone point out what's going wrong ?
Class A
#Entity
#Table(name="TABLE_A")
#Customizer(ACustomizer.class)
#Inheritance(strategy=InheritanceType.SINGLE_TABLE)
#ClassExtractor(AExtractor.class)
#InstantiationCopyPolicy
#Cacheable
#Cache( alwaysRefresh=true,
refreshOnlyIfNewer=true,
expiry=300000,
coordinationType = CacheCoordinationType.SEND_NEW_OBJECTS_WITH_CHANGES)
public class A implements Serializable {
#Column(name="ABC")
private String abc;
//some fields
}
Class Z
#Entity
#Customizer(ZCustomizer.class)
public class Z extends A{
//some fields
}
class X
#Entity
public class X extends A{
//some fields
}
I'm putting together a web API that needs to match an external sources XML format and was looking to rename the Data Type objects in the swagger output.
It's working fine on the members of the class but I was wondering if it was possible to override the class name as well.
Example:
[DataContract(Name="OVERRIDECLASSNAME")]
public class TestItem
{
[DataMember(Name="OVERRIDETHIS")]
public string toOverride {get; set;}
}
In the generated output I end up seeing
Model:
TestItem {
OVERRIDETHIS (string, optional)
}
I'd hope to see
OVERRIDECLASSNAME {
OVERRIDETHIS (string, optional)
}
Is this possible?
Thanks,
I had the same problem and I think I solved it now.
First of all add SchemaId in Swagger Configuration (from version 5.2.2 see https://github.com/domaindrivendev/Swashbuckle/issues/457):
GlobalConfiguration.Configuration
.EnableSwagger(c =>
{
c.SchemaId(schemaIdStrategy);
[...]
}
Then add this method:
private static string schemaIdStrategy(Type currentClass)
{
string returnedValue = currentClass.Name;
foreach (var customAttributeData in currentClass.CustomAttributes)
{
if (customAttributeData.AttributeType.Name.ToLower() == "datacontractattribute")
{
foreach (var argument in customAttributeData.NamedArguments)
{
if (argument.MemberName.ToLower() == "name")
{
returnedValue = argument.TypedValue.Value.ToString();
}
}
}
}
return returnedValue;
}
Hope it helps.
Pretty old question, but as I was looking for a similar solution, I bumped into this.
I think the code in Vincent's answer might not work.
Here is my take on it:
private static string schemaIdStrategy(Type currentClass)
{
var dataContractAttribute = currentClass.GetCustomAttribute<DataContractAttribute>();
return dataContractAttribute != null && dataContractAttribute.Name != null ? dataContractAttribute.Name : currentClass.Name;
}
Adding to the thread as I am not able to use the answer with Swashbukle for AspNetCore.
I am doing this. However I am not totally happy as if the object is contain in another object it is showing its original name. For example if you have a result set that is Paged That result is shown incorrectly.So this is not a final answer but might work on simple use cases.
I am using a Schema Filter. And the object just have [JsonObject(Title="CustomName")] as I get the Title property for the data type.
First Define a class like this:
public class CustomNameSchema : ISchemaFilter
{
public void Apply(Schema schema, SchemaFilterContext context)
{
if (schema?.Properties == null)
{
return;
}
var objAttribute = context.SystemType.GetCustomAttribute<JsonObjectAttribute>();
if( objAttribute!= default && objAttribute?.Title?.Length > 0)
{
schema.Title = objAttribute.Title;
}
}
}
On the startup you must configure a SchemaFilter
c.SchemaFilter<CustomNameSchema>();
//Base.as
public class Base
{
private var _foo:String;
[Bindable]
public function set foo(value:String):void
{
_foo = value;
}
public function get foo():String
{
return _foo;
}
/*
Many many setter/getter, methods, events
*/
}
//Control.as
public class MyControl extends Group
{
public function MyControl()
{
}
}
//Window.as
public class MyWindow extends spark.components.Window
{
public function MyWindow()
{
}
}
//Module
public class MyModule extends spark.modules.Module
{
public function MyModule()
{
}
}
I want to expose (friendly) Base properties, methods and events on the other classes. Something like this:
var window:MyWindow = new MyWindow();
window.foo = 'Hello World!';
var module:MyModule = new MyModule();
module.foo = 'bar';
<namespace:MyControl foo="Hello World!"/>
I don't want define all the properties in each class because they are many and the same for all of them.
Ideally would define something like:
public class MyControl extends Group, Base
{
public function MyControl()
{
}
}
(I know it can't be done.)
Thanks!
UPDATE:
Thanks again!
Maybe this clarify more my need... On business layer I have a variable called processID (and businessID, operationID, localityID, etc.) what be passed to Window from Menu, and Window passes it to Module. On Module Container, I have a CustomComponent what query database using this variable as parameter. This applied for all (almost) Components on Module. These variables are defined as level business layer, then I define a Class to store and manage these variables (and some related methods operating with these variables using business logic), so I can make a standalone class (or library) for every environment to reusing my common components. The idea is... insert a new CustomComponent and set these variables via mxml, like this:
<custom:MyCustomComponent id="zzz" processID="{processID}" businessID="{businessID}"/>
Module has the business logic for set (o not) any of the variables.
Otherwise, I would have to implement different logic for the CustomComponent (and Module) for read parent's variables and define these variables only in MyWindow (using composite pattern).
You can get your answer from following link -
http://flexinonroids.wordpress.com/2009/05/27/flex-3-dynamically-loading-components-at-runtime/
http://thecomcor.blogspot.in/2007/11/adobe-flex-dynamically-loading-classes.html
Or you can follow below approach -
1) Create an Interface as base
2) Extend your class with interface
3) Load class at runtime with SWFLoader.loaderContext.applicationDomain.getDefinition method
Thanks,
Varun
You can place your classes that require friendly access in the same package as your Base class, and define private fields without any access modifier( it is equivalent to internal modifier).
Otherwise, you can define your namespace like that:
namespace my_internal;
and then define class members like that:
my_internal var _foo:String;
after that, those members will be hidden for all code, except for code that contains
use namespace my_internal;
You can read more here:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/ActionScript/3.0_ProgrammingAS3/WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118a9b90204-7f9e.html#WS5b3ccc516d4fbf351e63e3d118a9b90204-7f91
However, using 'friend access' can be an evidence of bad design, so if I were you I'd think twice before defining namespaces.
Update:
pseudo-superclass 1:
package proxy
{
public class Simple1
{
public var x:int;
public var y:int;
}
}
pseudo-superclass 2:
package proxy
{
import mx.controls.Alert;
public class Simple2
{
public var name:String = 'noname';
public function doAlert():void{
Alert.show(name);
}
//not normal method to replace 'this' with proxy
Simple2.prototype.doCrossClass = function doCrossClass():void{
Alert.show(''+(Number(this['x'])+Number(this['y'])));
}
}
}
Code for testing the result (looks as what you are expecting?):
var mega:Mega = new Mega();
mega.x = 100;
mega.y = 200;
mega.name = 'Multiple inheritance';
mega.doAlert();
mega.doCrossClass(); //300
And now pseudo-subclass with multiple inheritance:
package proxy
{
import flash.utils.Proxy;
import flash.utils.flash_proxy;
public dynamic class Mega extends Proxy
{
public function Mega()
{
super();
}
public var superArray:Array = [new Simple1(), new Simple2()];
flash_proxy override function getProperty(name:*):*{
for each(var superClass:Object in superArray){
if( name in superClass){
return superClass[name];
}
}
throw new Error('no such property');
}
flash_proxy override function setProperty(name:*, value:*):void{
for each(var superClass:Object in superArray){
if( name in superClass){
superClass[name] = value;
return;
}
}
throw new Error('no such property');
}
flash_proxy override function callProperty(name:*, ...args):*{
for each(var superClass:Object in superArray){
if( name in superClass){
var f:Function = superClass[name] as Function;
return f.apply(this, args);
}
}
throw new Error('no such function');
}
}
}
You can also want to use javascript-like class construction(i.e. just using simple Object and assigning properties and functions to it in any combinations you want).
I'm trying to unit test some code that calls into VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute.
Is this possible with the unit testing tools provided with VS 2008? If not, is it possible with a later version of Visual Studio?
We're well past VS 2008 but for anyone who is still grappling with this issue, I've found a solution on: http://forums.asp.net/t/995143.aspx?Mocking+HTTPContext+object.
Use the following code in your test init to override the default AppDomain values. (The VirutalPathUtility static methods will use your new values.)
[TestInitialize]
public void Initialize()
{
// Fake out env for VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute(..)
string path = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory;
const string virtualDir = "/";
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appDomain", "*");
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appPath", path);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".appVPath", virtualDir);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".hostingVirtualPath", virtualDir);
AppDomain.CurrentDomain.SetData(".hostingInstallDir", HttpRuntime.AspInstallDirectory);
TextWriter tw = new StringWriter();
HttpWorkerRequest wr = new SimpleWorkerRequest("default.aspx", "", tw);
HttpContext.Current = new HttpContext(wr);
}
Static classes and methods are really hard to work with in unit tests (which is one reason why i try to avoid them). In this case, I would probably develop a wrapper around the static class, containing just those methods that I use. I would then use my wrapper class in place of the real class. The wrapper class would be constructed so that it is easy to mock out.
Example (sort of) using RhinoMocks. Note that it uses dependency injection to give the class under test a copy of the wrapper. If the supplied wrapper is null, it creates one.
public class MyClass
{
private VPU_Wrapper VPU { get; set; }
public MyClass() : this(null) {}
public MyClass( VPU_Wrapper vpu )
{
this.VPU = vpu ?? new VPU_Wrapper();
}
public string SomeMethod( string path )
{
return this.VPU.ToAbsolute( path );
}
}
public class VPU_Wrapper
{
public virtual string ToAbsolute( string path )
{
return VirtualPathUtility.ToAbsolute( path );
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void SomeTest()
{
string path = "~/path";
string expected = "/app/path";
var vpu = MockRepository.GenerateMock<VPU_Wrapper>();
vpu.Expect( v => v.ToAbsolute( path) ).Return( expected );
MyClass class = new MyClass( vpu );
string actual = class.SomeMethod( path );
Assert.AreEqual( expected, actual );
vpu.VerifyAllExpectations();
}
Using Microsoft Fakes we can fake VirtualPathUtility ToAbsolute Method easily.
Browse System.Web in References > Right Click > Add Fakes Assembly.
Use Following Code
using Microsoft.QualityTools.Testing.Fakes;
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
using System.Web.Fakes;
public class TestCode
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestSummaryTabLinks()
{
using (ShimsContext.Create())
{
//Fake VirtualPathUtility ToAbsolute method to Work properly in case of Unit Test Project
//For Finding Relative url.
ShimVirtualPathUtility.ToAbsoluteString = (string s) => { return s; };
MyClass class = new MyClass( vpu );
string actual = class.SomeMethod( path );
Assert.AreEqual( expected, actual );
}
}
}