Using t4, I want when the developer adds a class which ends to Report keyword (e.g. CompanyReport), put some code in that class.
Imagine I create a class named CompanyReport, I want the class to be like :
public class CompanyReport : IReportItem
{
private Company _company;
public CompanyReport(Company company)
{
_company = company;
}
public ReportBookmark BookMark
{
get { return ReportBookmark.Company; }
}
public void Report(ISetBookmark wordReport)
{
}
}
Maybe you should consider using a customized ItemTemplate for Visual Studio or just a snippet. Both are quite easy to build and redistribute. I'am also not sure if it is possible to invoke some T4-Template on creating (and really ONLY on creating) a class.
Related
How to bind mock of final class in Jukito ?
For example :
public final class SomeFinalClass(){
public SomeFinalClass(String someString){
}
}
//Testing class
#Runwith(JukitoRunner.class)
public class TestingClass(){
#Inject
private SomeFinalClass someFinalClassMock;
public static class TestModule extends JukitoModule {
#Override
protected void configureTest() {
// bind(SomeClient.class).in(TestSingleton.class);
}
#Provides
public SomeFinalClass getSomkeFinalClass() {
return Mokito.mock(SomeFinalClass.class); //throws error
}
}
}
Is there a way i can use PowerMockito with JukitoRunner ?
You can mock a final class if you're using Mockito 2. From Mockito 2 Wiki:
Mocking of final classes and methods is an incubating, opt-in feature. It uses a combination of Java agent instrumentation and subclassing in order to enable mockability of these types. As this works differently to our current mechanism and this one has different limitations and as we want to gather experience and user feedback, this feature had to be explicitly activated to be available ; it can be done via the mockito extension mechanism by creating the file src/test/resources/mockito-extensions/org.mockito.plugins.MockMaker containing a single line: mock-maker-inline.
After you created this file, Mockito will automatically use this new engine and one can do :
final class FinalClass {
final String finalMethod() { return "something"; }
}
FinalClass concrete = new FinalClass();
FinalClass mock = mock(FinalClass.class);
given(mock.finalMethod()).willReturn("not anymore");
assertThat(mock.finalMethod()).isNotEqualTo(concrete.finalMethod());
I've been dealing with this issue for a while, and still can't seem to find a solution. I have several repositories which wrap an EF 4 ObjectContext. An example is below:
public class HGGameRepository : IGameRepository, IDisposable
{
private readonly HGEntities _context;
public HGGameRepository(HGEntities context)
{
this._context = context;
}
// methods
public void SaveGame(Game game)
{
if (game.GameID > 0)
{
_context.ObjectStateManager.ChangeObjectState(game, System.Data.EntityState.Modified);
}
else
{
_context.Games.AddObject(game);
}
_context.SaveChanges();
}
public void Dispose()
{
if (this._context != null)
{
this._context.Dispose();
}
}
}
And I have the following NinjectModule:
public class DIModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
this.Bind<HGEntities>().ToSelf();
this.Bind<IArticleRepository>().To<HGArticleRepository>();
this.Bind<IGameRepository>().To<HGGameRepository>();
this.Bind<INewsRepository>().To<HGNewsRepository>();
this.Bind<ErrorController>().ToSelf();
}
}
Since I'm using the MVC 2 extension, these bindings default to InRequestScope().
My problem is that the ObjectContext isn't being handled properly. I get what's described here: https://stackoverflow.com/a/5275849/399584 Specifically, I get an InvalidOperationException that states:
The relationship between the two objects cannot be defined because they are attached to different ObjectContext objects.
This happens every time I try to update an Entity.
If I set my repos to bind InSingletonScope() it works, but seems like a bad idea.
What am I doing wrong?
EDIT: For clarity, I have just one ObjectContext that I want to share with all my repos per request.
You have to specify InRequestScope() in your module. Based on this article the default to transient, which is why you are getting more than one context.
public class DIModule : NinjectModule
{
public override void Load()
{
this.Bind<HGEntities>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
this.Bind<IArticleRepository>().To<HGArticleRepository>().InRequestScope();
this.Bind<IGameRepository>().To<HGGameRepository>().InRequestScope();
this.Bind<INewsRepository>().To<HGNewsRepository>().InRequestScope();
this.Bind<ErrorController>().ToSelf().InRequestScope();
}
}
Also did you add ninject to your project via nuget package manager or the old fashion way?
I have created a set of tests that I have grouped together by using a partial class. Is there a way to get the partial name to show up in the test runner? What I have is something like
File 1:
public partial class MyWrapperClass
{
[TestClass]
public class This_is_a_descriptive_scenario {
[TestMethod]
public void This_is_a_descriptive_scenario_outcome() { ... }
}
}
File 2:
public partial class MyWrapperClass
{
[TestClass]
public class This_is_a_descriptive_scenario2 {
[TestMethod]
public void This_is_a_descriptive_scenario2_outcome() { ... }
}
}
When running tests like that in the builtin test runner in Visual studio I can see the result as: MyWrapperClass+This_is_a_descriptive_test, if I have added the class column to the test result. But when you run the test in resharper's testrunne they are grouped by project and/or namespace and the class name, but I can't see that the tests are part of a partial class anywhere. Is that possible?
I don't think this is supported. Although it might be possible to extend it. I can point you in the right direction if you're willing to go down that path.
The easiest solution would be to use namespaces for grouping instead of partial classes.
Hope this helps
Miguel
The name of a partial class is the same in either file... No, there's nothing that currently groups tests by test file name.
Given this class:
class Foo
{
readonly ILog log;
public Foo(ILog log)
{
this.log = log;
}
...
}
I'd like to configure Unity to inject ILog. That's easy:
container.RegisterInstance<ILog>(LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(XYZ)));
But I'd like to make Unity call LogManager.GetLogger with the type of the parent type being resolved.
This is close:
container.RegisterType<ILog>(new InjectionFactory((c, t, s) => LogManager.GetLogger(t)));
But t in this case is the type being resolved (ILog), not the type that the object is being resolved for (Foo).
I know I can do this:
container.RegisterType<Foo>(new InjectionFactory(c => new Foo(LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(Foo)));
But I don't want to have to add that crazy declaration every time I register an object.
I know this can be done in Autofac, and I know the Real Answer is not to use Unity in the first place, but can this be done? :)
Unity might not give you all the goodies some of the other containers offer but I have yet to find a feature you can't easily add.
var container = new UnityContainer();
container.AddNewExtension<TrackingExtension>();
container.RegisterType<ILog>(
new InjectionFactory((ctr, type, name) =>
{
var tracker = ctr.Resolve<ITracker>();
var parentType = tracker.CurrentBuildNode.Parent.BuildKey.Type;
return LogManager.GetLogger(parentType);
}));
var sut = container.Resolve<UsesLog>();
Assert.AreEqual(typeof(UsesLog), sut.Log.Type);
You can find the source code for the TrackingExtension here. Its located in the TecX.Unity project folder.
If you want a DI container to return you a logger based on the class’ type information, then put the type information into the public interface so the DI container can see it. It removes the need for any container specific override features and then it won’t matter if you are using Unity or AutoFac.
Someone that knows the log4net object model well might be able to give you a more efficient implementation, but try something like this:
using System;
using Microsoft.Practices.Unity;
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
namespace UnityLoging
{
public interface ILog<T> : log4net.ILog
{ }
public class MyLogger<T> : log4net.Core.LogImpl, ILog<T>
{
public MyLogger() : base(log4net.LogManager.GetLogger(typeof(T).Name).Logger)
{ }
}
public class ClassToLog
{
private readonly log4net.ILog log;
public ClassToLog(ILog<ClassToLog> log)
{
this.log = log;
}
public void LogMe()
{
log.Debug("Got here");
}
}
[TestClass]
public class TestClass
{
[TestMethod]
public void GenericLogRegistrationTest()
{
log4net.Config.XmlConfigurator.Configure();
IUnityContainer container = new UnityContainer();
container.RegisterType(typeof(ILog<>), typeof(MyLogger<>));
ClassToLog c = container.Resolve<ClassToLog>();
c.LogMe();
log4net.LogManager.Shutdown();
}
}
}
This seems like a very clean approach: https://github.com/roblevine/UnityLoggingExtensions
I'm struggling with implementing a factory object. Here's the context :
I've in a project a custom store. In order to read/write records, I've written this code in a POCO model/separated repository:
public class Id { /* skip for clarity*/} // My custom ID representation
public interface IId
{
Id Id { get; set; }
}
public interface IGenericRepository<T> where T : IId
{
T Get(Id objectID);
void Save(T #object);
}
public interface IContext
{
TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
where T:IId;
IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>()
where T:IId;
}
My IContext interface defines two kind of repositories.
The former is for standard objects with only get/save methods, the later allows me to define specifics methods for specific kind of objects. For example :
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository : IGenericRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(Id objectID);
}
And it the consuming code I can do one of this :
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID); --> specific operation
Because most of objects repository are limited to get and save operations, I've written a generic repository :
public class BaseRepository<T> : IGenericRepository<T>
where T : IId, new()
{
public virtual T Get(Id objectID){ /* provider specific */ }
public void Save(T #object) { /* provider specific */ }
}
and, for custom ones, I simply inherits the base repository :
internal class WebServiceLogRepository: BaseRepository<WebServiceLog>, IWebServiceLogRepository
{
public ICollection<WebServiceLog> GetByOpenLogsByRecordID(Id objectID)
{
/* provider specific */
}
}
Everything above is ok (at least I think it's ok). I'm now struggling to implement the MyContext class. I'm using MEF in my project for other purposes. But because MEF doesn't support (yet) generic exports, I did not find a way to reach my goal.
My context class is looking like by now :
[Export(typeof(IContext))]
public class UpdateContext : IContext
{
private System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object> m_Implementations;
public UpdateContext()
{
m_Implementations = new System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary<Type, object>();
}
public TRepository GetRepository<T, TRepository>()
where T : IId
where TRepository : IGenericRepository<T>
{
var tType = typeof(T);
if (!m_Implementations.ContainsKey(tType))
{
/* this code is neither working nor elegant for me */
var resultType = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().SelectMany(
(a) => a.GetTypes()
).Where((t)=>t.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(TRepository))).Single();
var result = (TRepository)resultType.InvokeMember("new", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.CreateInstance, null, null, new object[] { this });
m_Implementations.Add(tType, result);
}
return (TRepository)m_Implementations[tType];
}
public IGenericRepository<T> GetRepository<T>() where T : IId
{
return GetRepository<T, IGenericRepository<T>>();
}
}
I'd appreciate a bit of help to unpuzzle my mind with this quite common scenario
Not sure if I've understood you correctly, but I think you're perhaps over complicating things. To begin with, make sure you've designed your code independent of any factory or Dependency Injection framework or composition framework.
For starters lets look at what you want your calling code to look like, this is what you said:
MyContext.GetRepository<Customer>().Get(myID); --> standard get
MyContext.GetRepository<WebServiceLog, IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myID);
You don't have to agree with my naming choices below, but it indicates what I undertand from your code, you can tell me if I'm wrong. Now, I feel like the calling would be simpler like this:
RepositoryFactory.New<IRepository<Customer>>().Get(myId);
RepositoryFactory.New<IWebServiceLogRepository>().GetOpenLogs(myId);
Line 1:
Because the type here is IRepository it's clear what the return type is, and what the T type is for the base IRepository.
Line 2:
The return type here from the factory is IWebServiceLogRepository. Here you don'y need to specify the entity type, your interface logically already implements IRepository. There's no need to specify this again.
So your interface for these would look like this:
public interface IRepository<T>
{
T Get(object Id);
T Save(T object);
}
public interface IWebServiceLogRepository: IRepository<WebServiceLog>
{
List<WebServiceLog> GetOpenLogs(object Id);
}
Now I think the implementations and factory code for this would be simpler as the factory only has to know about a single type. On line 1 the type is IRepository, and in line 2, IWebServiceLogRepository.
Try that, and try rewriting your code to simply find classes that implement those types and instantiating them.
Lastly, in terms of MEF, you could carry on using that, but Castle Windsor would really make things much simpler for you, as it lets you concentrate on your architecture and code design, and its very very simple to use. You only ever reference Castle in your app startup code. The rest of your code is simply designed using the Dependency Injection pattern, which is framework agnostic.
If some of this isn't clear, let me know if you'd like me to update this answer with the implementation code of your repositories too.
UPDATE
and here's the code which resolves the implementations. You were making it a bit harder for yourself by not using the Activator class.
If you use Activator and use only one Generic parameter as I've done in the method below, you should be ok. Note the code's a bit rough but you get the idea:
public static T GetThing<T>()
{
List<Type> assemblyTypes = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()
.SelectMany(s => s.GetTypes()).ToList();
Type interfaceType = typeof(T);
if(interfaceType.IsGenericType)
{
var gens = interfaceType.GetGenericArguments();
List<Type> narrowed = assemblyTypes.Where(p => p.IsGenericType && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
var implementations = new List<Type>();
narrowed.ForEach(t=>
{
try
{
var imp = t.MakeGenericType(gens);
if(interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(imp))
{
implementations.Add(imp);
}
}catch
{
}
});
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
else
{
List<Type> implementations = assemblyTypes.Where(p => interfaceType.IsAssignableFrom(p) && !p.IsInterface).ToList();
return (T)Activator.CreateInstance(implementations.First());
}
}