Is there a way to do the equivalent of #Stepwise's failure behavior for a single feature? We have some integration tests that are set up such that setupSpec() kicks off a Kafka process, and then the actual test checks that each step happened. If step 3 failed, there's no reason to bother checking subsequent steps.
There is no built-in way to do this, but assuming you are using a recent 2.x Spock version and not 1.3 or so, a relatively simple annotation-driven Spock extension can do the trick for you.
package de.scrum_master.stackoverflow.q71414311
import org.spockframework.runtime.extension.ExtensionAnnotation
import java.lang.annotation.ElementType
import java.lang.annotation.Retention
import java.lang.annotation.RetentionPolicy
import java.lang.annotation.Target
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target(ElementType.METHOD)
#ExtensionAnnotation(StepwiseIterationsExtension)
#interface StepwiseIterations {}
package de.scrum_master.stackoverflow.q71414311
import org.spockframework.runtime.extension.IAnnotationDrivenExtension
import org.spockframework.runtime.model.FeatureInfo
import org.spockframework.runtime.model.parallel.ExecutionMode
class StepwiseIterationsExtension implements IAnnotationDrivenExtension<StepwiseIterations> {
#Override
void visitFeatureAnnotation(StepwiseIterations annotation, FeatureInfo feature) {
// Disable parallel iteration execution for #StepwiseIterations feature,
// similarly to how #Stepwise disables it for the whole specification
feature.setExecutionMode(ExecutionMode.SAME_THREAD)
// If an error occurs in this feature, skip remaining iterations
feature.getFeatureMethod().addInterceptor({ invocation ->
try {
invocation.proceed()
}
catch (Throwable t) {
invocation.getFeature().skip("skipping subsequent iterations after failure")
throw t
}
})
}
}
Add this to your code base, annotate your iterated test with #StepwiseIterations and run it. I think the result is exactly what you are looking for.
In Spock 1.3, an similar, but more complex extension would also be possible.
I also want to express my special thanks to Leonard Brünings, Spock maintainer and boundless source of knowledge. I had a more complex version of this extension in place, but after discussing with him, it evolved into this tiny, elegant solution we are seeing here.
FYI, there is a pre-existing Spock issue #1008 requesting this feature. I created pull request #1442 which adds this capability to #Stepwise. So hopefully in the future we do not need an extra annotation and extra extension anymore.
Related
I try to write some custom lint rules. To achieve this, I used the analyzer_plugin package and I set up my project as it should be. Here is a simplified excerpt of the main class :
class LintAnalyzerPlugin extends ServerPlugin {
#override
Future<void> analyzeFile({required AnalysisContext analysisContext, required String path}) async {
channel.sendNotification(
AnalysisErrorsParams(path, [getAnalysisError(path)]).toNotification(),
);
}
}
channel.sendNotification is called but no message is displayed into VS Code Problems panel.
After some investigation, I found out that the JSON generated for the sent notification use Dart server Legacy protocol. But the Dart analyzer server run by Dart Code extension wait for LSP (Microsoft Language Server Protocol).
Fortunately the extension offers a setting to start the server with the Legacy protocol:
"dart.useLegacyAnalyzerProtocol": true
And now the VS Code Problems panel populates sent notifications.
Unfortunately Dart Code extension advises to use LSP because the Legacy protocol will eventually be removed some day.
Is it possible to generate LSP? Or did I miss something?
If anyone has any suggestions, I'm all ears.
I'm new to the Dart functions framework. My goal is to use this package to create several functions and deploy them to Cloud Run (in combination with Firebase, but I guess that's irrelevant to this question).
I've run the quick starts and I've read all of the contents in the docs.
The quick start mentions just one function at a time (e.g. Hello World, Cloud Events, etc..), like this:
import 'package:functions_framework/functions_framework.dart';
import 'package:shelf/shelf.dart';
#CloudFunction()
Response function(Request request) {
return Response.ok('Hello, World!');
}
But as you can see in the quickstarts only one function is handled in a project at a time. How about me wanting to deploy several functions? Should I:
Write several functions in the same project / file, so that the function framework compiles the 'server.dart` by itself
OR
Create a different functions_framework for each function?
Let me be more specific. Should I do the following (option 1 - which makes more sense to me):
import 'dart:math';
import 'package:functions_framework/functions_framework.dart';
import 'package:shelf/shelf.dart';
#CloudFunction()
Response function(Request request) {
return Response.ok('Hello, World!');
}
#CloudFunction()
Response function2(Request request) {
if (Random().nextBool()) {
return Response.ok('Hello, World!');
} else {
return Response.internalServerError();
}
}
Or should I build a different folder by running a build_runner for each function I need in my project?
Is there a difference and/or a best practice?
Thanks in advance.
EDIT. This question is related to the deployment on Cloud Run itself, and not just testing on my own PC. To test my own functions I did the following:
Run dart run build_runner build, so that it updates the server.dart file correctly (I can see that the framework does a lot behind the scenes and that the _nameToFunctionTarget is basically a router);
Run the server in two different terminals, like this: dart run bin/server.dart --port MYPORT --target MYFUNCTION (where MYPORT and MYFUNCTION are either 8080/8081 or function/function2 respectively).
I guess I'm just confused on how to correctly manage this framework once deployed on Cloud Run.
EDIT 2. I just gave up using Dart as a Serverless language or even a Backend language. There's just too much jargon even for the basic things. Any backend framework is either dead, or maintained by one single enthusiast guy (props to him!). This language has not yet received enough love from the Google Team / the community and at this moment in time is basically not possible to go fullstack on just Dart. It's a dream, but it can't be realized now. Furthermore, Dart hardly lacks a proper SDKs to use Firestore, etc., so Firebase isn't an option. I find it easier to just learn NodeJS and exploit the Firebase support for Firebase Functions written in NodeJS, and I'll wait for more support in there in the future, if there ever will be.
The documentation is a bit sparse right now (and I'm new to it also! I couldn't find any good examples, so here goes...)
You can only have a single function that is served. It should be
named 'function' (the type and name can be overriden, see the
cloudevent example dartfn generate cloudevent)
You 'could' have many of these deployed so that each does a specific thing, such as processing cloudevents above, but most people
want something more REST-like (see next)
You need to attach a Router() so that you can have the single entry point (function) handled by specific logic in your code.
Example for Rest
add to pubspec.yaml (in dependencies:) shelf_router: ^1.1.2
delegate the #CloudFunction to use the Router()
functions.dart
import 'package:functions_framework/functions_framework.dart';
import 'package:shelf/shelf.dart';
import 'package:shelf_router/shelf_router.dart';
Router app = Router()
..get('/health', (Request request) {
return Response.ok('healthy');
})
..get('/user/<user>', (Request request, String user) {
// fetch the user... (probably return as json)
return Response.ok('hello $user');
})
..post('/user', (Request request) {
// convert request body to json and persist... (probably return as json)
return Response.ok('saved the user');
});
#CloudFunction()
Future<Response> function(Request request) => app.call(request);
I'm new to dart, and following the tutorial provided on the Dart for the web page.
It all makes sense - apart from one piece of sytax:
final InjectorFactory injector = self.injector$Injector;
Here's the full code from the tutorial:
import 'main.template.dart' as self;
const useHashLS = false;
#GenerateInjector([
routerProvidersHash,
ClassProvider(Client, useClass: InMemoryDataService),
// Using a real back end?
// Import 'package:http/browser_client.dart' and change the
above to:
// ClassProvider(Client, useClass: BrowserClient),
])
final InjectorFactory injector = self.injector$Injector;
void main() {
runApp(ng.AppComponentNgFactory, createInjector: injector);
}
I'm a confused by the apparent .method$Class syntax. Can anyone explain to me what this means/what it's doing?
It's also underlined in Webstorm with the message The getter 'injector$Injector' isn't defined for the class 'self'. Regardless, it runs fine and works as expected.
Thanks in advance!
$ in an identifier has no special meaning. It's by convention often used for names in generated code.
Angular also uses code generation and the code will only become available after code generation was executed for example by webdev serve or webdev build.
I don't know the current state but the code might still be generated in a directory that is not analyzed by the DartAnalyzler and you might always see the error even wen the app can be run without problems.
I'm looking for a way to generate a warning anywhere in my code (top level, class, functions). As I'm typically having a 0 warning policy, this enables me to see where I make a change I need to revert before commit
For example in Java, i could do this:
private int warning_revert_to_false;
boolean DEBUG = true;
and it will generate a warning (according to my settings).
Using jslint/jshint that's easy (mixed tab/space for example), in C/C++ i can use pragma...
Basically I want the code to still compile and run and so far in Dart, I could not find a simple solution and I'm sure there is one that I have missed. Thanks!
Add the following library to your program:
library forced;
import 'package:meta/meta.dart';
class Forced {
#deprecated
static void warning() {
}
}
Wherever you want a forced warning you can simply write:
Forced.warning();
My original issue is described perfectly by this post: I want to follow TDD:
write a small test
watch it fail
write just enough code to make it succeed
watch it succeed
repeat
I am working on a Grails project in IntelliJ. If all I want is to write normal JUnit tests, the above post solves everything:
Head to /test/unit
Put some test code in a "class Xyz extends GroovyTestCase" class
Hit Shift F10
JUnit report pops up within a second or two
The problem is that I would like to use one of the very cool "describe-in-english" testing setups, like Easyb or Spock.
What do I do? It would be magic to just start with the auto-generated Test class Grails makes for me, then cram Spock stuff into it. Obviously I can't use "extends" twice. Does this give the gist of what I'm trying to do though?
class Xyz extends GroovyTestCase extends spock.lang.Specification {
//void testSomething() {
// fail "Implement me"
//}
def "length of Spock's and his friends' names"() {
expect:
name.size() == length
where:
name | length
"Spock" | 5
"Kirk" | 4
"Scotty" | 6
}
}
Extend spock classes, not groovy's. You can choose from UnitSpec, ControllerSpec, IntegrationSpec and others as listed in source code. Spock will take care of the rest.
-Use "grails install-templates"
-Change the Tests templates to something along the lines of:
#artifact.package#
import grails.test.mixin.*
import org.junit.*
import spock.lang.Specification
#TestFor(#artifact.testclass#)
class #artifact.name# extends Specification {
}
-Write the test code in Spock (or normal JUnit code)
-IntelliJ->Run->Edit Configurations. Add New Configuration of the JUnit type. Test kind: <All in package/All in UnitTest directory/All in one UnitTest class/etc.>
-(Shortcut: Cursor over method name, or class name->ctrl-shift-F10)
On my original question:
In retrospect, I was getting hung-up on the "run all in directory" part of that blog post. Current IntelliJ DOES let you run all JUnit tests in a directory, or the entire project.
Once I understood that, the next step was to realize that Spock tests ARE JUnit tests. Make a "class Xyz extends Specification {}" class in the test/unit directory, fill it with Spock code, and Run as... JUnit. Magic!