I configured a deep link in react-navigation using the instructions on https://reactnavigation.org/docs/configuring-links#handling-nested-navigators. I have a few nested navigators so the linking config that I pass into the NavigationContainer is not trivial. So I'd like to write a test for it to prevent future bugs.
Any ideas on how I can write a test for it in Jest so that a given deep link goes to the screen that I wish?
You have a couple of options:
Mock Linking module and render your app, you should have correct pages rendered based on the returned link from getInitialURL
Import the getStateFromPath function and pass the path and a config and check the returned path
I know you asked for tests, but the linking config is type-checked if you specify a global RootParamList - which should already help with having correct nesting without the need for tests.
Related
I am using Python3.4. I have installed a certain "itunespy" library from GitHub with pip, to work with iTunes API.
(https://github.com/spaceisstrange/itunespy)
I can now access it from console by
import itunespy
Except the library is only searching the US store through iTunes Api, whereas I need to access the UK store. I looked into the code and found I only need to change two lines to fix my problem.
Please can you tell me how I can access and change the source code of an already installed library.
Thank you.
Fork the repository
Clone the forked repository
Make changes and push to your remote (origin, usually)
You may pip install from your fork
I took a look at source code, and:
a) you may obviously change your source code in locally-copied file
b) you may patch these constants in run-time, like adding this type of code to your main:
import itunespy
itunespy.base_search_url = "NEW_VALUE"
itunespy.base_lookup_url = "NEW_VALUE"
c) library API seems to provide country keyword argument, so you do not have to do any of these hacks mentioned above. Simply do:
itunespy.search_track('something', country='UK')
With this keyword argument, searches should work as expected without any modifications of source code.
you really want to change the sourcecode?
How about just change your implementation?
inherit from the class
override/overload their methods with your own
work with your inherited class and their methods
pro: if there are changes in the original library you will take them with you when you update (secure-patches etc.) but your overridden/overloaded methods are still the one you use.
otherwise if you really want to change the source code, take a branch from github and change the sourcecode as you need it like mentioned by dolftax
I had resigned myself to the fact that every require statement in Typescript had to be relative to the file you were typing in, but I recently discovered an application that does this differently and it confuses me. I was hoping someone with enough skill could explain how this is working to me.
The application in question is the new Raven DB HTML5 Studio, which uses typescript, you can find the whole application here:
RavenDB HTML5 Studio
When browsing its source code, I came across something interesting... if you go and look at many of the files; In specific the one I am looking at... app/viewmodels/deleteItems.ts, it has a reference at the top that reads..
import document = require("models/document");
but models/document isn't a path relative to deleteItems.ts, but this works. Can someone explain how this is happening? I'm linking you RIGHT to the exact files I'm talking about. This kind of behavior is littered all over this application.
app/viewmodels/deleteItem.ts
app/models/document.ts
This is exactly the kind of behavior I really wanted to try and emulate in my own code, since trying to keep all of the paths relative to the file I'm working in is a headache, but this program seems to be completely free of that requirement.
This doesn't necessarily involve RavenDB, but I am tagging it anyway, because perhaps someone who has read over the Raven repository will understand it and be able to answer.
Update
I am trying to mimic this behavior in my own code, and not finding any success. I am sorry if I seem outright stupid, but this is all really confusing me. Here is what my structure looks like; My repository is private, so I cannot really just link to it.
app_content
scripts
home
controls
models
editors
utils
UserControls.ts
UserMapping.ts
UserElements.ts
ui
lib
jquery
jquery.js
jquery.validate.js
jquery.ui.js
kendo
kendo.all.js
kendo.aspnetmvc.js
// other libraries
Alright, that's a general feel for my folder layout. All typescript files are under the /home folder so that I can prevent github from saving their compiled javascript and locking that.
So then, in the file UserControls.ts, it looks like this right now...
import userElements = require('./UserElements');
import userMapping = require('./UserMapping');
export class UserControls {
// code
}
No matter what combinations I have tried, this is the only format/syntax that doesn't throw errors in Visual Studio. But from what I see in the RavenDB project, I should very much be able to declare it like ...
import userElements = require('utils/UserElements');
import userMapping = require('utils/UserMapping');
export class UserControls {
// some code
}
No matter what combinations I have tried, this is the only format/syntax that doesn't throw errors in Visual Studio. But from what I see in the RavenDB project, I should very much be able to declare it like ...
That is because they are using a drandalJS configuration to tell it how to resolve the file path. (see https://github.com/ayende/ravendb/blob/New3/Raven.Studio.Html5/App/main.js)
There isn't a similar configuration (basePath) for TypeScript at the moment. Your best option is to use relative paths as you've already noticed.
PS: an old but still relevant video that shows you how requirejs config works and relevance when using TypeScript https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AGQpv0MKsA&hd=1
The TypeScript compiler's module resolution algorithm is essentially undocumented, unfortunately. It tries to "split the difference" between AMD and CommonJS's module resolution rules, so it's somewhat hard to reason about.
What you're seeing here is an attempt to mimic CommonJS's "walk up the tree" resolution rule. When in the path C:\a\b\c\d resolving x, first C:\a\b\c\d\x is tried, then C:\a\b\c\x, then C:\a\b\x, and so on until it hits the root folder and gives up.
Backstory:
I've currently got a Require.js and jQuery/Backbone.js using site. Until now, jQuery and Backbone have stayed outside of Require, letting me do:
define([], function() {
// NOTE: Using Backbone and $ without an import!
new Backbone.View(el: $('#foo');
});
That's worked really well: without that approach, just about every module in my site would have to add a Backbone/jQuery dependency.
But then the other day I needed to package up a portion of our code as an external library. I made a separate require config file for it, and everything seemed great, until I compiled ("optimized") all the files in to a single library file, and realized that Backbone/jQuery (and related plug-ins/libraries) weren't getting included.
So, I added a bunch of shims, and got Backbone, jQuery, and all the related libraries in to Require. However, I still have a ton of modules that expect $ and Backbone to just exist. That should be ok, because Backbone/jQuery both register their variables globally, but it's not because of Require's load order.
Basically, any module without dependencies is broken, because they load before Require loads the jQuery/Backbone shim. Any modules that have dependencies don't have this issue, because jQuery/Backbone have already been loaded by the time they get loaded.
It seems like my only option is to add an explicit Backbone/jQuery to every module without dependencies. I've got a bunch of modules like that though, and ideally I'd prefer not to have to import jQuery/Backbone anywhere.
Question
So, my question is: is there any way to tell Require "load these X modules/shims before you load everything else"? Or, to put it another way, is there any way to tell Require that all of my modules depend on certain other modules?
I thought putting Backbone at the top of my initial require:
require(['backbone', ...
but that didn't help; the other dependency-less modules still load before it.
I see no reason this would not work:
require(['backbone', 'jquery'], function () {
require(['main']);
});
The idea is to wrap what was your initial entry point to your application in a require call that loads Backbone and jQuery. If the modules of your application are loaded only because main is required (that is, if there is no require call elsewhere that loads any module needed by main), then with the code above both Backbone and jQuery are guaranteed to be loaded before any of the modules used by main are.
I'm looking for a solution to use __dirname (or equivalent) inside a TypeScript class compiled in AMD, __dirname doesn't exists there. And because it's typescript, I can't (or I don't know how) import module that contains uri, allowing me to get the uri.
I found the solution once, but I don't remember how and I can't find it again so far.
I took a look to this, but it's in pure javascript and I use typescript, I tried to import module, but I get a TS error.
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/9027429/how-to-use-nodejs-global-module-objects-in-requirejs-modules
One solution is to:
In app.js, create a global var:
__basePath = __dirname;
Then, in the AMD script, use __basepath + 'relativePathFromBasePath' to load the file.
I know I found another solution but I cannot remember how.
I do not use TypeScript, but on the basis of the TypeScript code I've seen and on the basis of what I know of RequireJS, I believe you should be able to access module.uri like this:
import module = require("module");
console.log(module.uri);
The name module is special. You could also use require.toUrl(<module name>) (that's Url as in URL whereas the variable above is uri as in URI) but it does not seem as useful as module.uri for this task. For one thing you'd have to include the module's name in the call.
module.uri may contain .., so it needs cleaning up. I understand your code to be running server-side, so in Node.js we'd call path.dirname(path.normalize(module.uri)).
How can you access the "special-keys" module from an Intern functional test?
I've tried specifying the path in the opening define statement of the test, I've also tried updating the "loader" attribute in the intern.js configuration file, but with no success so far. This must be a fairly common use case for a functional test but I've not had any luck so far and can find any examples in the source or the Git Wiki.
In Intern 1.3+ you may access that module through intern/dojo/node!wd/lib/special-keys. Alternatively you may simply use the escape codes directly in your type/keys strings.