I have an assembly loaded into .NET reflector and I have the reflexil addin.
I found a method in the assembly but it's private. Copying the whole method to my code is too much work because it uses many other methods in the assembly. I just want to change
private void Check(string Proxy, int Port)
to
public void Check(string Proxy, int Port)
So I can use it in my code. Does anybody know how to change it and how to save the fixed assembly after that?
Kirk
Instead of re-writing the assembly, consider using Reflection from your code to invoke the private method dynamically, see:
How do I use reflection to invoke a private method?
Related
I am trying to test my Service class below
#Service
#RequiredArgsConstructor(onConstructor = #__(#Autowired))
public class TaskTemplateService {
#NonNull
TaskTemplateRepository taskTemplateRepository;
public void doStuff() {
List<MyObject> list;
doOtherStuff(list)
}
private void doOtherStuff(List <MyObject>) {
//do stuff
}
}
When I am testing the real TaskTemplate, how can I capture what is passed to doOtherStuff?
You cannot and why would you?
Good testing means to specify the behaviour of a unit's public interface. Private methods ought to be covered via testing this way indirectly. If this is not possible then either you have dead, unreachable code or a design problem and should refactor.
BTW, the technical reason that you cannot mock/stub private methods is that most mocking tools, also the built-in feature of Spock, use dynamic proxies (DP) in order to implement mocking. DP technically are subclasses, but private methods can never be extended or even seen by subclasses or being called by them or from other classes, hence the term "private". Consequently, a mock subclass cannot check interactions with private methods.
How exactly you ought to redesign your class in order to make it testable really depends on why you want to "capture" the method argument, as you say. Do you need to replace it by a mock? Do you need to modify or verify the content of the original object?
If the object has a central meaning and you need to replace or verify it, why not make it injectable instead of creating it as a local variable, hermetically sealing it off from the outside world and making it untestable?
Or maybe in your case you could make the private method protected or package-scoped in order to make it testable. Then at least a mock could be created for it and you could capture the argument or stub the result.
I am mostly speculating here because the answer really depends on what is behind //do stuff, i.e. the very information you are hiding in your sample code.
I am working on an Android application that will call a .so file created by a different Android NDK application.
I have created the following folder structure in my project and copied over the .so files as seen below:
|--app:
|--|--src:
|--|--|--main
|--|--|--|--jniLibs
|--|--|--|--|--armeabi
|--|--|--|--|--|--libmylib.so
|--|--|--|--|--x86
|--|--|--|--|--|--libmylib.so
I call this library through my application via the following code:
static {
System.loadLibrary("mylib");
}
I then call the method from this shared object via the following code:
String str = stringFromJNI();
This does not work as the program looks for mangled function name as follows:
com.example.androidlibcall.MainActivity.stringFromJNI() where my .so function will be using a different package name and hence a different function name is generated.
I am not really sure what I need to do to call the functions from the external library, I assume I can create my own library and utilize dlopen() to load the external library and make calls to it, but was wondering if there are the other methods to achieve this or not.
My ultimate goal is to be able to create applications that can call pre-existing libraries that are on the mobile device, but since I am new to NDK/Android I am not sure what is the best method for this and have not found good examples to work with.
A lot of the pre-existing similar questions seem to be dealing with older versions of Android Studio that don't seem applicable anymore.
I am using the latest version of Android Studio (3.1.2) with Gradle 4.4 on Windows 7 machine.
Please advise.
Thanks!
Generally speaking, it's not a good idea to have native methods in application's MainActivity, but this should not worry us now that we are forging a workaround.
Assume that your new project has com.example.other.MainActivity.java, and you want to call the native method com.example.androidlibcall.MainActivity.stringFromJNI() from com.example.other.MainActivity.onCreate(). To do this, create a new Java class in your other app:
package com.example.androidlibcall;
public class MainActivity {
public static native String stringFromJNI();
}
and in your existing MainActivity class,
package com.example.other;
import static com.example.androidlibcall.MainActivity.stringFromJNI;
class MainActivity {
static {
System.loadLibrary("mylib");
}
}
public class MainActivity extends Activity {
public void onCreate(Bundle savedInstanceState) {
super.onCreate(savedInstanceState);
…
String qq = stringFromJNI();
…
}
}
You see that com/example/androidlibcall/MainActivity.java contains no logic, no data, no code. It is only a wrapper that lets us easily use libmylib.so without rebuilding it.
Every time I think I've found an example of this, it turns out to be that it's an example of mocking rather than testing. Note that the answer might be "don't do it that way" which I expect it might. I see lots of folks just using reflection but i was wondering if there's an easier way.
You use reflection. Alternatively, you take the approach that I take, which is that you do not test private methods explicitly and simply test them implicitly while testing public methods that consume them.
EDIT: Read this for discussion of the philosophy of testing private methods:
Should I test private methods or only public ones?
This is the PowerMockito way.
#Test
public void testCallPrivateMethod() throws Exception {
Point actual = Whitebox.invokeMethod(powerMockDemo,
"privateMethod", new Point(11, 11));
assertThat(actual.getX(), is(12));
assertThat(actual.getY(), is(12));
}
https://automationrhapsody.com/call-private-method-powermock/
I've been working on a prototype code application that runs in C# and uses classes and functions from older C++ code (in the form of an imported DLL). The code requirement is to pass in a class object to the unmanaged C++ DLL (from C#) and have it be stored/modified for retrieval later by the C# application. Here's the code I have so far...
Simple C++ DLL Class:
EXPORT_DLL int init(MyInitParams *initparams);
C++ DLL Functions:
struct MyInitParams {
public:
int _np;
int _nm;
int type;
double *CV_Weight;}
in c# DLL
[DllImport("NEWUSEMPC", CallingConvention = CallingConvention.Cdecl, EntryPoint = "init")]
public static extern int init(InitParams parameters);
in c# class
class InitParams
{
public int _np;
public int _nm;
public int type;
public double[] CV_Weight;}
If you own the code of the c++ dll it would be a lot more convenient for you to include it in your solution, and create an interop between c# and c++ using managed c++ as a translation layer. Be aware, that the managed c++ layer should only do the translation of data and invoke the native method, and literally nothing else, because managed c++ is designed only as a bridge between the native and managed world.
You can also use mixed debugger to check out what is happening in both managed and unmanaged code in debug to take a look on the variables, so that you can see what's missing.
I personally would discourage the use of platform invoke instead of an interop class, because the latter is a lot cleaner and is easier to maintain later on.
I think i understood how CDI works and in order to dive deep in it, i would like to try using it with something real world example. I am stuck with one thing where i need your help to make me understand. I would really appreciate your help in this regard.
I have my own workflow framework developed using Java reflection API and XML configurations where based on specific type of "source" and "eventName" i load appropriate Module class and invoke "process" method on that. Everything is working fine in our project.
I got excited with CDI feature and wanted to give it try with workflow framework where i am planning inject Module class instead of loading them using Reflection etc...
Just to give you an idea, I will try to keep things simple here.
"Message.java" is a kind of Transfer Object which carries "Source" and "eventName", so that we can load module appropriately.
public class Message{
private String source;
private String eventName;
}
Module configurations are as below
<modules>
<module>
<source>A</source>
<eventName>validate</eventName>
<moduleClass>ValidatorModule</moduleClass>
</module>
<module>
<source>B</source>
<eventName>generate</eventName>
<moduleClass>GeneratorModule</moduleClass>
</module>
</modules>
ModuleLoader.java
public class ModuleLoader {
public void loadAndProcess(Message message){
String source=message.getSource();
String eventName=message.getEventName();
//Load Module based on above values.
}
}
Question
Now , if i want to implement same via CDI to inject me a Module (in ModuleLoader class), I can write Factory class with #Produce method , which can do that. BUT my question is,
a) how can pass Message Object to #Produce method to do lookup based on eventName and source ?
Can you please provide me suggestions ?
Thanks in advance.
This one is a little tricky because CDI doesn't work the same way as your custom solution (if I understand it correctly). CDI must have all the list of dependencies and resolutions for those dependencies at boot time, where your solution sounds like it finds everything at runtime where things may change. That being said there are a couple of things you could try.
You could try injecting an InjectionPoint as a parameter to a producer method and returning the correct object, or creating the correct type.
There's also creating your own extension of doing this and creating dependencies and wiring them all up in the extension (take a look at ProcessInjectionTarget, ProcessAnnotatedType, and 'AfterBeanDiscovery` events. These two quickstarts may also help get some ideas going.
I think you may be going down the wrong path regarding a producer. Instead it more than likely would be much better to use an observer especially based on what you've described.
I'm making the assumption that the "Message" transfer object is used abstractly like a system wide event where basically you fire the event and you would like some handler defined in your XML framework you've created to determine the correct manager for the event, instantiate it (if need be), and then call the class passing it the event.
#ApplicationScoped
public class MyMessageObserver {
public void handleMessageEvent(#Observes Message message) {
//Load Module based on above values and process the event
}
}
Now let's assume you want to utilize your original interface (I'll guess it looks like):
public interface IMessageHandler {
public void handleMessage(final Message message);
}
#ApplicationScoped
public class EventMessageHandler implements IMessageHandler {
#Inject
private Event<Message> messageEvent;
public void handleMessage(Message message) {
messageEvent.fire(message);
}
}
Then in any legacy class you want to use it:
#Inject
IMessageHandler handler;
This will allow you to do everything you've described.
May be you need somthing like that:
You need the qualifier. Annotation like #Module, which will take two paramters source and eventName; They should be non qualifier values. See docs.
Second you need a producer:
#Produces
#Module
public Module makeAmodule(InjectionPoint ip) {
// load the module, take source and eventName from ip
}
Inject at proper place like that:
#Inject
#Module(source="A", eventName="validate")
Module modulA;
There is only one issue with that solution, those modules must be dependent scope, otherwise system will inject same module regardles of source and eventName.
If you want to use scopes, then you need make source and eventName qualified parameters and:
make an extension for CDI, register programmatically producers
or make producer method for each and every possible combinations of source and eventName (I do not think it is nice)