I use sub-flows extensively and would like to have an option to generate a separate ATE flow file per sub-flow (e.g. on V93K a separate .tf file). Is this possible? Perhaps something like this, wih the default being the current behavior:
import :my_subflow, generate_standalone: true
The reason this is valuable is that we use a test program assembler that can merge multiple flow files together given a sequence of flow files. This saves on test program load time for debug sessions.
thx
There is no switch like that currently, but note that you can generate sub-flows directly:
origen p program/_my_subflow.rb
The leading "_" in the name means that they will be not be generated as standalone flows if you point the program generator to the directory (origen p program/), but if you explicitly ask it to generate that file then it will.
Related
I wanted to create a job where I need to consider the latest file available as input file.
File format is as below: FILE1.TEST.TYYMMDD
is there any way to identify latest file based on date present in file name via JCL.
P.S. GDG versions are not created in existing process . Only PS file is created.
Thank you
I wanted to create a job where I need to consider the latest file available as input file. File [name] format is as below: FILE1.TEST.TYYMMDD is there any way to identify latest file based on date present in file name via JCL.
No.
You indicate that GDGs are not created in the existing process. GDGs would be the best way to accomplish your goal. Absent GDGs, you must write code.
You could accomplish your goal by writing (C, clist, COBOL, PL/I, Rexx) code using the LMDINIT and LMDLIST ISPF services. Then you would execute your code by running ISPF in batch. Many mainframe shops have a cataloged procedure to execute ISPF in batch.
Agree with #cschneid that there is not a platform way to handle this. However, I want to point out that GDGs are the platform way of managing PS files for access in a relative form.
Your comment
GDG versions are not created in existing process . Only PS file is
created.
That statement didn't make sense to me. GDGs are not a file type like physical sequential (PS) or partitioned (PO). It's a convention to allow relative reference to files created over time which sounds like what you want. I've only seen the use of GDGs for PS files.
Putting the date in the file name can have its uses but to z/OS its only part of the filename and not meta information that it operates on (like G0000v00's in GDGs.
I am trying to read a file content after executing a class GetContentsAPI, basically this class GetContentsAPI will write into the file /etc/api/token.
class Main{
require GetContentsAPI
file("/etc/api/token")
}
When I did the above steps, its says Evaluation Error: Error while evaluating a Function Call, Could not find any files from /etc/api. Not sure how to make sure the file is already created before trying to read.
Thanks James
The file() function reads the contents of a file during catalog building. You don't present any details of class GetContentsApi, but all of the standard puppet facilities that write to files (especially, but not limited to, File resources) write during catalog application. Unless you've cooked up something highly customized, the file() function will always read before GetContentsApi writes.
Moreover, in a master / agent setup (which is the only kind supported in current Puppet), catalog building happens on the master, whereas catalog application happens on the target node, which is usually a different machine, so you're unlikely even to be able to read what was written during a previous catalog-building run.
Also, file() just returns the file contents as a string, so it's not very useful to call it without using the return value somehow.
It's not at all clear what you're trying to achieve, but from what I can see, you are not going in a fruitful direction. Perhaps you should take a step back and ask a different question about that.
We use the test_ids gem to handle our binning assignment and it works great. We use that information to create some 3rd party files versus using the native ATE binning. The issue arises when we pass multiple flow files to the 'program' command.
origen p func_cpu_flow.rb func_gpu_flow.rb
In between flow generation the test interface gets reset and the binning information it knows about gets lost. Is there an API in the test_ids gem that would return a hash with keys being the test names and values being the bin information? Then I could call this method on the last flow file generation event and create the 3rd party files.
thx
It doesn't really provide anything like that today, though if you reach in this should be close to what you want:
TestIds.current_configuration.allocator.store['assigned']['bins']
TestIds.current_configuration.allocator.store['manually_assigned']['bins']
I am using the latest version of pyRevit, v45.
I'm writing some info in temporary files with
myTempFile = script.get_instance_data_file("id")
This creates a file named pyRevit_2018_xxxx_id.tmp in which I store useful info. If I'm not mistaken, the "xxxx" part is changing every time I reload Revit. Now, I need to get access to this information from another pyRevit script.
How can I retrieve the name of the temp file I need to read? In other words, how do I access "myTempFile" from within the second script, which has no idea of the name of "myTempFile"?
I guess I can share somehow that variable between my script, but what's the proper way to do this? I know this must be a very basic programming question, but I'm indeed not a programmer ;)
Thanks a lot,
Arnaud.
Ok, I realise now that my variables in the 1st script cease to exist after its execution.
So for now I wrote the file name in another file, of which I know the name.. That works.
But if there's a cleaner way to do this, I'd be glad to learn ;)
Arnaud
pyrevit.script module provides 4 different methods for creating temporary files based on their use case:
get_instance_data_file:
for data files marked with Revit instance pid. This means that scripts running on another instance will not see this temp file.
http://pyrevit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/pyrevit/script.html#pyrevit.script.get_instance_data_file
get_universal_data_file:
for temp files accessible to all Revit instances and versions
http://pyrevit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/pyrevit/script.html#pyrevit.script.get_universal_data_file
get_data_file:
Base method to get a standard temp file for current revit version
http://pyrevit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/pyrevit/script.html#pyrevit.script.get_data_file
get_document_data_file:
temp file marked with active document (so scripts working on another document will not see this)
http://pyrevit.readthedocs.io/en/latest/pyrevit/script.html#pyrevit.script.get_document_data_file
Each method uses a pattern to create the temp file name. So as long as the call to the method is the same of different scripts, the method generates the same file name.
Example:
Script 1:
from pyrevit import script
tfile = script.get_data_file('mydata')
Script 2:
from pyrevit import script
tempfile = script.get_data_file('mydata')
In this example tempfile = tfile since the file id is the same.
There is documentation on each so make sure you take a look at those and pick the flavor that serves your purpose.
I have a cucumber feature file 'A' that serves as setting up environment (data clean up and initialization). I want to have it executed before all other feature files can run.
It's it kind of like #before hook as in http://zsoltfabok.com/blog/2012/09/cucumber-jvm-hooks/. However, that does not work because my feature files 'A' contains hundreds of cucumber steps and it is not as simple as:
#Before
public void beforeScenario() {
tomcat.start();
tomcat.deploy("munger");
browser = new FirefoxDriver();
}
instead it's better to be able to run 'A' as a feature file as a whole.
I've searched around but did not find a answer. I am so surprised that no one has this type of requirement before.
The closest i found is 'background'. But that means i can have only one huge feature file with the content of 'A' as 'background' at the top, and rest of my test in the same file. I really do not want to do that.
Any suggestions?
By default, Cucumber features are run single thread in order by:
Alphabetically by feature file directory
Alphabetically by feature file name within directory
Scenario execution is then by order within the feature file.
So have your initialization feature in the first directory (alhpabetically) with a file name that sorts first (alphabetically) in that directory.
That being said it is generally a bad practice to require an execution order in your feature files. We run our feature files in parallel so order is meaningless. For Jenkins or TeamCity you could add a build step that executes the one feature file followed by a second build step that executes the rest of your feature files.
I have also a project, where we have a single feature file, that contains a very long scenario called Scenario: Test data with a lot of very long scenarios, like this:
Given the system knows about the following employees
|uuid|user-key|name|nickname|
|1|0101140000|Anna|annie|
... hundreds of lines like this follow ...
We see this long SystemKnows scenarios as quite valuable, so that our testers, Product Owner and developers have a baseline of what data are in the system. Our domain is quite complex, and we need this baseline of reference data for everyone to be able to understand the tests.
(These reference data become almost like well known personas, and are a shared team metaphore)
In the beginning, we were relying on the alphabetic naming convention, to have the AAA.feature to be run first.
Later, we discovered that this setup was brittle, and decided to use the following trick, inspired by the PageObject pattern:
Add a background with the single line Given(~'^I set test data for all feature files$')
In the step definition, have a factory to create the test data, and make sure inside the factore method, that it is only created once, like testFactory.createTestData()
In this way, you have both the convenience of expressing reference setup as a scenario, that enhances team communication, but you also have a stable test setup.
Hope this is helpful!
Agata