Have some multiline strings that are presented to the user and stored as Heredocs. So rather than a 'normal' (Java) property file, a groovy-based one (see here) to be consumed by ConfigSlurper was used and works great. Sorry if this is a dumb question, but can that be easily internationalized? If so, can you outline how that is accomplished?
My solution: In your ConfigSlurper you should store keys to the internalized strings. Inject messageSourceand localResolver in your controller/service, get key from your ConfigSlurper and find localized string in your i18n messages.property file. Example (not sure that code is correct, but it's the main idea):
def config = new ConfigSlurper().parse(new File('src/Config.groovy').toURL())
//localized string1 value
def msg = messageSource.getMessage(config.data1.string1, null, localeResolver.defaultLocale)
As far as I know the ConfigSlurper does not have special support for i18n.
You may achieve it by using the leveraging its support for environments by creating an environment closure per locale. For example:
environments {
english {
sample {
hello = "hello"
}
}
spanish {
sample {
hello = "hola"
}
}
}
When creating the ConfigSlurper you will need to pass the desired language:
def config = new ConfigSlurper("spanish")
Related
I want to check for multiple string comparison in groovy.
For example:
if (cityName in ('AHD','BLR','DEL'))
{
}
But, using this way, it is giving syntax error.
To define in-place collection use [] instead of ():
if (cityName in ['AHD','BLR','DEL']) {
}
Anyway, in is used correctly.
I am developing cucumber scenarios using Cucumber JVM (Groovy) in intellij. Things are much better than doing the same in eclipse I must say.
I'd like to resolve one small problem to make things even better for my team. But since I am new to Intellij, I need help with the following please:
When I am in a step def file (groovy), Intellij can't seem to see variables and methods defined in the cucumber "World" object. So don't get IDE support (auto-complete, etc) for those which is a bit annoying. How can I fix that?
IntelliJ IDEA expects an object inside World closure. So, you could define the folloing block in EACH step definitions file:
World {
new MockedTestWorld()
}
MockedTestWorld.groovy:
class MockedTestWorld implements TestWorld {
#Lazy
#Delegate
#SuppressWarnings("GroovyAssignabilityCheck")
private TestWorld delegate = {
throw new UnsupportedOperationException("" +
"Test world mock is used ONLY for syntax highlighting in IDE" +
" and must be overridden by concrete 'InitSteps.groovy' implementation.")
}()
}
To cleanup duplicated world definitions we use last-glue initializers and a bit of copy-paste:
real/InitSteps.groovy
def world
GroovyBackend.instance.#worldClosures.clear()
GroovyBackend.instance.registerWorld {
return world ?: (world = new RealTestWorld1()) // Actual initialization is much longer
}
legacy/InitSteps.groovy
def world
GroovyBackend.instance.#worldClosures.clear()
GroovyBackend.instance.registerWorld {
return world ?: (world = new LegacyTestWorld1())
}
Finally, run configurations would be like this (with different glues):
// Real setup
glue = { "classpath:test/steps", "classpath:test/real", },
// Legacy setup
glue = { "classpath:test/steps", "classpath:test/legacy", },
What I've Done
I am using soapUI (3.6.1 Free version) mock services to serve up specific data to 2 client applications I am testing. With some simple Groovy script I've set up some mock operations to fetch responses from specific files based on the requests made by the client applications.
The static contents of the mock response is:
${responsefile}
The groovy in the operation dispatch scripting pane is:
def req = new XmlSlurper().parseText(mockRequest.requestContent)
if (req =~ "CategoryA")
{
context.responsefile = new File("C:/soapProject/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml").text
}
else
{
context.responsefile = new File("C:/soapProject/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryB.xml").text
}
In this example, when the client application issues a request to the mock service that contains the string CategoryA, the response returned by soapUI is the contents of file ID_List_CategoryA.xml
What I'm Trying To Achieve
This all works fine with the absolute paths in the groovy. Now I want to pull the whole collection of soapUI project file and external files into a package for easy re-deployment. From my reading about soapUI I hoped this would be as easy as setting the project Resource Root value to ${projectDir} and changing my paths to:
def req = new XmlSlurper().parseText(mockRequest.requestContent)
if (req =~ "CategoryA")
{
context.responsefile = new File("Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml").text
}
else
{
context.responsefile = new File("Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryB.xml").text
}
... keeping in mind that the soapUI project xml file resides in C:/soapProject/
What I've Tried So Far
So, that doesn't work. I've tried variations of relative paths:
./Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
One post indicated that soapUI might consider the project files parent directory as the root for the purposes of the relative path, so tried the following variations too:
./soapProject/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
/soapProject/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
soapProject/Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml
When none of that worked I tried making use of the ${projectDir} property in the groovy script, but all such attempts failed with a "No such property: mockService for class: Script[n]" error. Admittefly, I was really fumbling around when trying to do that.
I tried using information from this post and others: How do I make soapUI attachment paths relative?
... without any luck. Replacing "test" with "mock," (among other changes), in the solution code from that post resulted in more property errors, e.g.
testFile = new File(mockRunner.project.getPath())
.. led to...
No such property: mockRunner for class: Script3
What I Think I Need
The posts I've found related to this issue all focus on soapUI TestSuites. I really need a solution that is MockService centric or at least sheds some light on how it can be handled differently for MockServices as opposed to TestSuites.
Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks. Mark.
The Solution - Provided by GargantuChet
The following includes the changes suggested by GargantuChet to solve the problem of trying to access the ${projectDir} property and enable the use of relative paths by defining a new projectDir object within the scope of the groovy script:
def groovyUtils = new com.eviware.soapui.support.GroovyUtils(context)
def projectDir = groovyUtils.projectPath
def req = new XmlSlurper().parseText(mockRequest.requestContent)
if (req =~ "CategoryA")
{
context.responsefile = new File(projectDir, "Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryA.xml").text
}
else
{
context.responsefile = new File(projectDir, "Test_Files/ID_List_CategoryB.xml").text
}
I'm not familiar with Groovy, but I assume the File is a normal java.io.File instance.
Relative paths are interpreted as being relative to the application's current directory. Try something like the following to verify:
def defaultPathBase = new File( "." ).getCanonicalPath()
println "Current dir:" + defaultPathBase
If this is the case here, then you may want to use the new File(String parent, String child) constructor, passing your resource directory as the first argument and the relative path as the second.
For example:
// hardcoded for demonstration purposes
def pathbase = "/Users/chet"
def content = new File(pathbase, "Desktop/sample.txt").text
println content
Here's the result of executing the script:
Chets-MacBook-Pro:Desktop chet$ groovy sample.groovy
This is a sample text file.
It will be displayed by a Groovy script.
Chets-MacBook-Pro:Desktop chet$ groovy sample.groovy
This is a sample text file.
It will be displayed by a Groovy script.
Chets-MacBook-Pro:Desktop chet$
You could have also done the following to get the value of projectDir:
def projectDir = context.expand('${projectDir}');
I am currently using CSS to change everything I write to upperCase when I create an entry, but that is not enough. When I save things, the text shown in the text fields is upper case, but the real value that Grails stores stays in lower case.
I am assuming I'd need to change something in the controller or anything.
Maybe transforming the $fieldValue CSS could work??
Any ideas would help!
Thnks!
You could just write setters for your domain object?
class Domain {
String aField
void setAField( String s ){
aField = s?.toUpperCase()
}
}
I think you are asking how to change values on your domain objects to uppercase. If this is not the case please clarify the question.
You have a bunch of options. I would recommend
1) In a service method, before you save, using String.toUpperCase() to modify the appropriate values on the domain object.
or
2) You can use the underlying Hibernate interceptors by defining a beforeInsert method on your domain object, and doing the toUpperCase there. (see 5.5.1 of the grails documentation)
or
3) You could do this client side. However, if it is a "business requirement" that the values are stored as upper, then I recommend doing the translation server side. It is easier to wrap tests around that code....
Using annotations is cleanest approach
import org.grails.databinding.BindingFormat
class Person {
#BindingFormat('UPPERCASE')
String someUpperCaseString
#BindingFormat('LOWERCASE')
String someLowerCaseString
}
Here is link for it: Grails doc for data binding
You can use Groovy metaprogramming to change the setter for all domain class String-typed properties without actually writing a custom setter for each property.
To do this, add something like the following to the init closure of Bootstrap.groovy
def init = { servletContext ->
for (dc in grailsApplication.domainClasses) {
dc.class.metaClass.setProperty = { String name, value ->
def metaProperty = delegate.class.metaClass.getMetaProperty(name)
if (metaProperty) {
// change the property value to uppercase if it's a String property
if (value && metaProperty.type == String) {
value = value.toUpperCase()
}
metaProperty.setProperty(delegate, value)
} else {
throw new MissingPropertyException(name, delegate.class)
}
}
}
}
I've built a custom builder in Groovy by extending BuilderSupport. It works well when configured like nearly every builder code sample out there:
def builder = new MyBuilder()
builder.foo {
"Some Entry" (property1:value1, property2: value2)
}
This, of course, works perfectly. The problem is that I don't want the information I'm building to be in the code. I want to have this information in a file somewhere that is read in and built into objects by the builder. I cannot figure out how to do this.
I can't even make this work by moving the simple entry around in the code.
This works:
def textClosure = { "Some Entry" (property1:value1, property2: value2) }
builder.foo(textClosure)
because textClosure is a closure.
If I do this:
def text = '"Some Entry" (property1:value1, property2: value2)'
def textClosure = { text }
builder.foo(textClosure)
the builder only gets called for the "foo" node. I've tried many variants of this, including passing the text block directly into the builder without wrapping it in a closure. They all yield the same result.
Is there some way I take a piece of arbitrary text and pass it into my builder so that it will be able to correctly parse and build it?
Your problem is that a String is not Groovy code. The way ConfigSlurper handles this is to compile the text into an instance of Script using GroovyClassLoader#parseClass. e.g.,
// create a Binding subclass that delegates to the builder
class MyBinding extends Binding {
def builder
Object getVariable(String name) {
return { Object... args -> builder.invokeMethod(name,args) }
}
}
// parse the script and run it against the builder
new File("foo.groovy").withInputStream { input ->
Script s = new GroovyClassLoader().parseClass(input).newInstance()
s.binding = new MyBinding(builder:builder)
s.run()
}
The subclass of Binding simply returns a closure for all variables that delegates the call to the builder. So assuming foo.groovy contains:
foo {
"Some Entry" (property1:value1, property2: value2)
}
It would be equivalent to your code above.
I think the problem you described is better solved with a slurper or parser.
See:
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Reading+XML+using+Groovy%27s+XmlSlurper
http://groovy.codehaus.org/Reading+XML+using+Groovy%27s+XmlParser
for XML based examples.
In your case. Given the XML file:
<foo>
<entry name='Some Entry' property1="value1" property2="value2"/>
</foo>
You could slurp it with:
def text = new File("test.xml").text
def foo = new XmlSlurper().parseText(text)
def allEntries = foo.entry
allEntries.each {
println it.#name
println it.#property1
println it.#property2
}
Originally, I wanted to be able to specify
"Some Entry" (property1:value1, property2: value2)
in an external file. I'm specifically trying to avoid XML and XML-like syntax to make these files easier for regular users to create and modify. My current solution uses ConfigSlurper and the file now looks like:
"Some Entry"
{
property1 = value1
property2 = value2
}
ConfigSlurper gives me a map like this:
["Some Entry":[property1:value1,property2:value2]]
It's pretty simple to use these values to create my objects, especially since I can just pass the property/value map into the constructor.