I currently have a xtext grammar that looks like the following :
Features:
'feature' name = ID
'{'(
('action' '{' action+=Actions (',' action+=Actions)* '}')? &
('dependencies' '{' dependencies = Dependencies '}')? &
('children' '{' children = Children '}')?
)'}'
;
What I want to do with this is add an action to an already existing source file programatically, for that I am using the IUnitOfWork.Void class that I subclass for easier implementation , it currently looks like this (the meaningful part of it) :
final XtextEditor editor = (XtextEditor)sourcepart;
final IXtextDocument document = editor.getDocument();
document.modify(new IUnitOfWork.Void<XtextResource>(){
public void process (XtextResource resource) throws Exception {
IParseResult parseResult = resource.getParseResult();
if(parseResult ==null)
return;
CompositeNode rootNode=(CompositeNode) parseResult.getRootNode();
LeafNode node = (LeafNode)NodeModelUtils.findLeafNodeAtOffset(rootNode, 0);
EObject object =NodeModelUtils.findActualSemanticObjectFor(node);
Through this I traverse the tree of the model and get to my Features object to which I want to add an action to (this is done through a pop up menu in a custom Tree View I'm implementing)
Here's my problem : whenever I want to add an action it screws up the way the tags are placed in the source file , and by that I mean that instead of :
action {
act1.set (foo),
act2.set (bar),
act3.set (baz),
act4.set (booze) //where this is the new action that I add
}
it will add it as
action {
act1.set (foo),
act2.set (bar),
act3.set (baz)
}
action {
act4.set(booze)
}
And this is illegal by the rules of my grammar, and I'm not allowed to change the way it should be written. (I am allowed to make small changes to the way the rules are implemented, but would really want to avoid it as it would mean a whole new amount of work to reimplement other things that depend on them)
I've tried :
adding it directly through Features.getAction().add(*the new action);
copying the items in the list into an array with the toArray() method so as to avoid referencing, adding my action to the array, clearing the list then adding all the elements again one by one
creating an entirely new Features object and setting everything in it to be the same as the currently edited one then replacing the feature with the new one
And I'm out of ideas after that. The frustrating part is that the 3rd method worked for a different kind of object in my grammar and had no errors there.
How could I make this work ?
this is a bug in xtext. (can you please file a ticket?)
as a workaround you may use the following
Features:
'feature' name = ID
'{'(
('action' '{' actionList=ActionList '}')? &
('dependencies' '{' dependencies = Dependencies '}')? &
('children' '{' children = Children '}')?
)'}';
ActionList:
(action+=Action (',' action+=Action)*)
;
Related
When I want to make cross referencing between grammar rules in Xtext work, I need to use keyword name for that. E.g.:
Constant:
name=NAME_TERMINAL "=" number=Number;
ConstUsage:
constant=[Constant | NAME_TERMINAL];
Is it possible to change this word to another one (e.g. id) ? I need it e.g. in case when I have rule, which uses parameter name for something else.
you can use a custom implementation of IQualifiedNameProvider e.g. by subclassing DefaultDeclarativeQualifiedNameProvider.
public class MyDslQNP extends DefaultDeclarativeQualifiedNameProvider{
QualifiedName qualifiedName(Element e) {
Package p = (Package) e.eContainer();
return QualifiedName.create(p.getName(), e.getId());
}
}
see https://dietrich-it.de/xtext/2011/07/16/iqualifiednameproviders-in-xtext-2-0.html for the complete example
I'm writing a small DSL that stores a list of coordinates:
Model:
locations+=Coordinates*
;
Coordinates:
'(' x=INT ',' y=INT ')'
;
I'm working now on the validator, and one of the things I want to make sure is that the list does not contain the same location (set of coordinates) twice. For this, I've written the following validator check:
#Check
def checkLocation(Model model) {
val locationSet = newHashSet
for (location : model.locations) {
if (!locationSet.add(location)) {
error('Locations must be unique.', location, LOCATION)
}
}
}
So that the locations get added to a HashSet and an error occurs if the same locations gets added twice. However, this doesn't work (the error never gets triggered). I'm guessing because the class Coordinates does not define the hashCode and equals methods that are required for the HashSet to work.
Any ideas on how could I make the HashSet work? Is it possible to define the implementation of the hashCode and equals methods of the generated class?
I created an ActivityNode (an Entry) and I can add custom fields with the
setFields(List<Field> newListField)
fonction.
BUT
I am unable to modify these fields. (In this case I try to modify the value of the field named LIBENTITE)
FieldList list = myEntry.getTextFields();
List<Field> updatedList = new ArrayList<Field>();
//I add each old field in the new list, but I modify the field LIBENTITE
for(Field myField : list){
if(myField.getName().equals("LIBENTITE")){
((TextField)myField).setTextSummary("New value");
}
updatedList.add(myField);
}
myEntry.setFields(updatedList);
activityService.updateActivityNode(myEntry);
This code should replace the old list of fields with the new one, but I can't see any change in the custom field LIBENTITE of myEntry in IBM connections.
So I tried to create a new list of fields, not modifying my field but adding a new one :
for(Field myField:list){
if(!myField.getName().equals("LIBENTITE")){
updatedList.add(myField);
}
}
Field newTextField = new TextField("New Value");
newTextField .setFieldName("LIBENTITE");
updatedList.add(newTextField );
And this code is just adding the new field in myEntry. What I see is that the other custom fields did not change and I have now two custom fields named LIBENTITE, one with the old value and the second with the new value, in myEntry.
So I though that maybe if I clear the old list of Fields, and then I add the new one, it would work.
I tried the two fonctions
myEntry.clearFieldsMap();
and
myEntry.remove("LIBENTITE");
but none of them seems to work, I still can't remove a custom field from myEntry using SBT.
Any suggestions ?
I have two suggestions, as I had (or have) similar problems:
If you want to update an existing text field in an activity node, you have to call node.setField(fld) to update the field in the node object.
Code snippet from my working application, where I'm updating a text field containing a (computed) start time:
ActivityNode node = activityService.getActivityNode(id);
node.setTitle(formatTitle()); // add/update start and end time in title
boolean startFound = false;
// ...
FieldList textfields =node.getTextFields();
Iterator<Field> iterFields = textfields.iterator();
while (iterFields.hasNext()) {
TextField fld = (TextField) iterFields.next();
if (fld.getName().equals(Constants.FIELDNAME_STARTTIME)) {
fld.setTextSummary(this.getStartTimeString()); // NOTE: .setFieldValue does *not* work
node.setField(fld); // write updated field back. This seems to be the only way updating fields works
startFound=true;
}
}
If there is no field with that name, I create a new one (that's the reason I'm using the startFound boolean variable).
I think that the node.setField(fld) should do the trick. If not, there might be a way to sidestep the problem:
You have access to the underlying DOM object which was parsed in. You can use this to tweak the DOM object, which finally will be written back to Connections.
I had to use this as there seems to be another nasty bug in the SBT SDK: If you read in a text field which has no value, and write it back, an error will be thrown. Looks like the DOM object misses some required nodes, so you have to create them yourself to avoid the error.
Some code to demonstrate this:
// ....
} else if (null == fld.getTextSummary()) { // a text field without any contents. Which is BAD!
// there is a bug in the SBT API: if we read a field which has no value
// and try to write the node back (even without touching the field) a NullPointerException
// will be thrown. It seems that there is no value node set for the field. We
// can't set a value with fld.setTextSummary(), the error will still be thrown.
// therefore we have to remove the field, and - optionally - we set a defined "empty" value
// to avoid the problem.
// node.remove(fld.getName()); // remove the field -- this does *not* work! At least not for empty fields
// so we have to do it the hard way: we delete the node of the field in the cached dom structure
String fieldName = fld.getName();
DeferredElementNSImpl fldData = (DeferredElementNSImpl) fld.getDataHandler().getData();
fldData.getParentNode().removeChild(fldData); // remove the field from the cached dom structure, therefore delete it
// and create it again, but with a substitute value
Field newEmptyField = new TextField (Constants.FIELD_TEXTFIELD_EMPTY_VALUE); // create a field with a placeholder value
newEmptyField.setFieldName(fieldName);
node.setField(newEmptyField);
}
Hope that helps.
Just so that post does not stay unanswered I write the answer that was in a comment of the initial question :
"currently, there is no solution to this issue, the TextFields are read-only map. we have the issue recorded on github.com/OpenNTF/SocialSDK/issues/1657"
I get the following error while trying to evaluate a predicate in a a4solution:
Fatal error in /some/path at line 9 column 2: Field "field
(A/Attribute <: type)" is not bound to a legal value during
translation.
Here is the code at the origin of the error:
for(ExprVar a : solution.getAllAtoms()){
// additional checks are here to assure that a is of an "appropriate type"
solution.eval(predicate.call(a));
}
In my vain attempts to solve this problem by myself, I read from this source http://code.google.com/p/alloy4eclipse/issues/detail?id=86 that the way the solution has been read from the file might cause this problem.
But the source doesn't give further details.
I have created my solution object as follows :
XMLNode xml = new XMLNode(new StringReader(source.getFileContent()));
this.solution = A4SolutionReader.read(new ArrayList<Sig>(), xml);
Thank you for your support
The problem was that the expression to be evaluated (predicate.call(a)) was drawn from one CompModule object (namely the predicate function was taken from there) while the solution object, against which the expression was evaluated, was not obtained from the same CompModule, but was read from a file.
Generally, when reading a solution from an xml file, to be on the safe side, it is recommended to reread and reconstruct everything from that xml file, e.g.,
XMLNode xmlNode = new XMLNode(new File("my_solution.xml"));
String alloySourceFilename = xmlNode.iterator().next().getAttribute("filename");
Module module = CompUtil.parseEverything_fromFile(rep, null, alloySourceFilename);
A4Solution ans = A4SolutionReader.read(module.getAllReachableSigs(), xmlNode);
In some cases it suffices to just pass the sigs from the original CompModule to the reconstructed solution:
XMLNode xmlNode = new XMLNode(new File("my_solution.xml"));
A4Solution ans = A4SolutionReader.read(originalModule.getAllReachableSigs(), xmlNode);
I'm writing a workflow validator in Groovy to link two issues based on a custom field value input at case creation. It is required that the custom filed value to Jira issue link be unique. In other words, I need to ensure only one issue has a particular custom field value. If there is more than one issue that has the input custom field value, the validation should fail.
How or what do I return to cause a workflow validator to fail?
Example code:
// Set up jqlQueryParser object
jqlQueryParser = ComponentManager.getComponentInstanceOfType(JqlQueryParser.class) as JqlQueryParser
// Form the JQL query
query = jqlQueryParser.parseQuery('<my_jql_query>')
// Set up SearchService object used to query Jira
searchService = componentManager.getSearchService()
// Run the query to get all issues with Article number that match input
results = searchService.search(componentManager.getJiraAuthenticationContext().getUser(), query, PagerFilter.getUnlimitedFilter())
// Throw a FATAL level log statement because we should never have more than one case associated with a given KB article
if (results.getIssues().size() > 1) {
for (r in results.getIssues()) {
log.fatal('Custom field has more than one Jira ssue associated with it. ' + r.getKey() + ' is one of the offending issues')
}
return "?????"
}
// Create link from new Improvement to parent issue
for (r in results) {
IssueLinkManager.createIssueLink(issue.getId(), r.getId(), 10201, 1, getJiraAuthenticationContext().getUser())
}
try something like
import com.opensymphony.workflow.InvalidInputException
invalidInputException = new InvalidInputException("Validation failure")
this is based of the groovy script runner. If it doesn't work for you, i would recommend you using some sort of framework to make scripting easier, I like using either groovy script runner , Jira Scripting Suite or Behaviours Plugin
. All of them really makes script writing easier and much more intuitive.