(I use typo3 4.5 with extbase-extension.)
I was map the pages_language_overlay to my extbase-model
Tx_Extension_Domain_Model_ModelName {
mapping {
tableName = pages_language_overlay
}
}
I created a model Tx_Extension_Domain_Model_ModelName with some setters and getters. after adding the repository Tx_Extension_Domain_Repository_ModelNameRepository with
public function initializeObject() {
$this->defaultQuerySettings = $this->objectManager->create('Tx_Extbase_Persistence_Typo3QuerySettings');
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectStoragePage(FALSE);
}
and inject the repository like this
public function injectModelNameRepository(Tx_Extension_Domain_Repository_ModelNameRepository $modelNameRepository) {
$this->modelNameRepository = $modelNameRepository;
}
i can not select entries with findByPid. I was testing it with findByUid and echo the pid and it works, but i get no results with findByPid.
Someone has an idea?
I only have to add
public function initializeObject() {
$this->defaultQuerySettings = $this->objectManager->create('Tx_Extbase_Persistence_Typo3QuerySettings');
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectStoragePage(FALSE);
$this->defaultQuerySettings->setRespectSysLanguage(FALSE);
}
after this it works well. Otherwise the query has a check like
AND pages_language_overlay.sys_language_uid IN (0,-1)
in the where clause.
Related
I need to find a way to get an instance of DataProcessingEngine without calling it's constractor.
I am trying to find a way to do so using the registered DataProcessingEngine in composition object (please see the following code). But I could not find a way to do so.
Anyone have a suggestion? Thanks in advance.
public class Composer : IUserComposer
{
public void Compose(Composition composition)
{
composition.Register<IDataProcessingEngine, DataProcessingEngine>(Lifetime.Singleton);
//DataProcessingEngine dataProcessing = compostion.Resolve<IDataProcessingEngine>()??//no resolve function exists in Umbraco.Core.Composing
SaveImagesThread(dataProcessingEngine);
}
public Task SaveImagesThread(IDataProcessingEngine dataProcessingEngine)//TODO - decide async
{
string dataTimerTime = WebConfig.SaveProductsDataTimer;
double time = GetTimeForTimer(dataTimerTime);
if (time > 0)
{
var aTimer = new System.Timers.Timer(time);
aTimer.Elapsed += new ElapsedEventHandler(dataProcessingEngine.SaveImages);
aTimer.Start();
}
return default;
}
}
For all of you who are looking for a way to call a function (that's defined in another class in your code, an Engine or ...) from the composer(where the app starts) and want to avoid calling this function's class' constractor. I've found another way to do so:
public class QueuePollingHandler
{
[RuntimeLevel(MinLevel = RuntimeLevel.Run)]
public class SubscribeToQueuePollingHandlerComponentComposer :
ComponentComposer<SubscribeToQueuePollingHandler>
{ }
public class SubscribeToQueuePollingHandler : IComponent
{
private readonly IDataProcessingEngine _dataProcessingEngine;
public SubscribeToQueuePollingHandler(IDataProcessingEngine
dataProcessingEngine)
{
_dataProcessingEngine = dataProcessingEngine;
SaveImagesThread(_dataProcessingEngine);
}
public void SaveImagesThread(IDataProcessingEngine
dataProcessingEngine)
{
....
}
}
And the logic explenation: You create a class (SubscribeToQueuePollingHandlerComponentComposer from the example) and define its base class to be ComponentComposer<Class_that_inherits_IComponent>.
And when you start the application you could see that it gets to the registered class' constractor (SubscribeToQueuePollingHandler constructor).
That's the way that I found to be able to call a function right when the application starts without needing to call its class constractor and actualy use dependency injection.
I'm trying to establish a way of unit testing my service layer (& repositories) using some dummy data. I've seen examples of this before with Generic Repositories but I'm struggling to get something working whilst using a DatabaseFactory.
When I call the GetPhrase method from repository.Object I just get null back everytime.
I'm using NUnit and Moq. Any pointers on where i'm going wrong would be appreciated, or let me know if i'm better off going down a different road
e.g. Connecting to a local db for tests (SQL CE etc)
Here are the main components of the code:
public class PhraseRepository : RepositoryBase<Phrase>, IPhraseRepository
{
public PhraseRepository(IDatabaseFactory databaseFactory)
: base(databaseFactory)
{
}
public string GetPhrase(string phraseCode)
{
return this.GetMany(p => p.PhraseCode == phraseCode).First().Descript;
}
}
public interface IPhraseRepository : IRepository<Phrase>
{
string GetPhrase(string phraseCode);
}
public class CLPRiskPhraseService : ICLPRiskPhraseService
{
private readonly IPhraseRepository phraseRepository;
public string GetPhrase(string phraseCode)
{
return phraseRepository.GetPhrase(phraseCode);
}
}
[Test]
public void GetPhrase()
{
var phrases = new FakePhraseData().GetPhrases();
phraseRepository.Setup(m => m.GetMany(It.IsAny<Expression<Func<Phrase, bool>>>())).Returns(phrases);
var result = phraseRepository.Object.GetPhrase("H300");
// Assert
NUnit.Framework.Assert.IsNotNull(phraseRepository.Object);
NUnit.Framework.Assert.AreEqual("Description0", result);
}
Invoking phraseRepository.Object.GetPhrase("H300") in your test will always return null unless you set it up to return something different.
I think you're mistakenly thinking that this call to GetPhrase will invoke GetMany like the concrete PhraseRepository does, but you need to remember that it's just a mock of the interface IPhraseRepository. A method on a mocked object will always return the default value of the return type (in this case string) unless you use Setup to change the behavior of that method.
I use int? for all my required 'FK' properties in ViewModels. This gives me an easy way of specifying on a Create view model that a value is nullable and must be assigned a value to satisfy the Required attribute.
My problem comes in because I create the domain model entity first, using a domain factory, then map it to the view model. Now, many of the nullable ints in the view model get assigned 0 from non-nullable ints in the domain model. I would prefer not to build the new entity in the view model and only map it back to the domain model to avoid his. What else can I do? i'm sure there is som Automapper voodoo that can help me.
EDIT: you dont need to do any of this, but i thought i'd leave it here for people looking for a similar solution. really all you have to do is just provide a mapping from int to int? like this: Mapper.Map<int, int?>()
in that case, I believe you could use a custom type converter, which inherits from automappers ITypeConverter. This code works, I've run it through .NET Fiddle:
using System;
using AutoMapper;
public class Program
{
public void Main()
{
CreateMappings();
var vm = Mapper.Map<MyThingWithInt, MyThingWithNullInt>(new MyThingWithInt());
if (vm.intProp.HasValue)
{
Console.WriteLine("Value is not NULL!");
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("Value is NULL!");
}
}
public void CreateMappings()
{
Mapper.CreateMap<int, int?>().ConvertUsing(new ZeroToNullIntTypeConverter ());
Mapper.CreateMap<MyThingWithInt, MyThingWithNullInt>();
}
public class ZeroToNullIntTypeConverter : ITypeConverter<int, int?>
{
public int? Convert(ResolutionContext ctx)
{
if((int)ctx.SourceValue == 0)
{
return null;
}
else
{
return (int)ctx.SourceValue;
}
}
}
public class MyThingWithInt
{
public int intProp = 0;
}
public class MyThingWithNullInt
{
public int? intProp {get;set;}
}
}
You can always use the .ForMember() method on your mapping. Something like this:
Mapper
.CreateMap<Entity, EntityDto>()
.ForMember(
dest => dest.MyNullableIntProperty,
opt => opt.MapFrom(src => 0)
);
I am about to switch from Windsor to Structuremap for an existing project with ~100 registered components (mostly singletons).
All components inherit from a common base class that provides logging and health tracking and for this reason, contains a "Name" property used to identify component instances.
With Windsor, it was possible to set the component's Name property to the name that was used to register the component in the IOC container (We used a Facility for this).
My question: Is something like this possible with Structuremap?
(I dream of a call to c.For<IFoo>.Use<Bar>.Named("Doe") that magically results in instanceOfBar.Name = "Doe" somewhere.)
Here is what I tried:
using System;
using StructureMap;
using StructureMap.Interceptors;
using System.Diagnostics;
namespace ConsoleApplication1
{
interface IServiceA { }
interface IServiceB { }
class Base
{
public string Name { get; set; }
}
class ComponentA : Base, IServiceA { }
class ComponentB : Base, IServiceB
{
public ComponentB(IServiceA serviceA)
{
this.ServiceA = serviceA;
}
public IServiceA ServiceA { get; private set; }
}
class SetNameInterceptor : TypeInterceptor
{
public bool MatchesType(Type type) { return true; }
public object Process(object target, IContext context)
{
// *** Any other way? This does not work...
string name = context.BuildStack.Current != null ? context.BuildStack.Current.Name : context.RequestedName;
((Base)target).Name = name;
return target;
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Container container = new Container(c =>
{
c.RegisterInterceptor(new SetNameInterceptor());
c.For<IServiceA>().Use<ComponentA>().Named("A");
c.For<IServiceB>().Use<ComponentB>().Named("B");
});
var b = container.GetInstance<IServiceB>();
// both Fail:
Debug.Assert(((ComponentB)b).Name == "B");
Debug.Assert(((ComponentA)((ComponentB)b).ServiceA).Name == "A");
}
}
}
The above obviously does not work, I tried several variations but had no luck. The registered name of the target object does not seem to be consistently reachable via IContext.
My second best approach would be to define a new "NamedComponent(...)" extension method that resolves to Named(name).WithProperty(x => x.Name).EqualTo(name), but I wonder if this can be avoided to keep component registration as "structuremap-like" as possible?
Am I missing something?
I've never used WithProperty before but if it works the way I'd expect it should do the trick for you.
I think I would favor using EnrichWith though. Something like:
c.For<IFoo>().Use<Foo>().Named(name).EnrichWith(f => f.Name = name);
EnrichWith is a bit more explicit about what it's doing IMO, and lets you call any code on your instance before returning it to the caller. I like that this lets you do a straightforward assignment as well.
There is also a more complex handler you can use with EnrichWith that gives access to the context of the request - this would allow you to do something like this:
c.For<IFoo>().Use<Foo>().Named(name)
.EnrichWith((c, i) => {
i.Name = c.RequestedName;
return i;
});
This may be overkill for your situation but the contextual awareness can be pretty useful.
I using StructureMap to create instances of ModuleData
I have many classes that inherit from ModuleData(class A,B,C...) and each of them get Config1 or Config2 in coustructor
In Registry(located in file1.cs) I scan all types of ModuleData.
In Get(lacated in file2.cs) I get the instance.
I want that when ObjectFactory creates Config1/Config2 while creating instance of ModuleData it will pass "param" to Config1/Config2 constructors.
How I can configure structuremap to do this?
P.S. Registry & Get methods are located in different files!!!
Thank you
public class Config1
{
Config1(string param)
{
}
}
public class Config2
{
Config2(string param)
{
}
}
//.....//
public class A : ModuleData
{
A(Config1 c)
{
}
}
public class B : ModuleData
{
A(Config2 c)
{
}
}
//....//
//located in file1.cs
public Registry()
{
Scan(x =>
{
x.TheCallingAssembly();
x.AddAllTypesOf<ModuleData>();
});
ObjectFactory.Initialize(x =>
{
x.For<Config1>().Use<Config1>();
x.For<Config2>().Use<Config2>();
});
}
//....//
//located in file2.cs
public ModuleData Get(object o)
{
var module = o as PageModule;
var t = Type.GetType(string.Format("{0}.{1},{2}", Settings.Namespace, module.Name, Settings.Assembly));
return ObjectFactory.With("param").EqualTo(module.Parameters).GetInstance(t) as ModuleData;
}
I can't think of a good way to do what you want, I think its a bit of a design problem... I think you would have to explain a bit more about why you need to do this for me to help you.
What is a page module? Why is your config objects dependent on it?
Based on your comment, I think what you need is a factory object that creates ModuleData objects for you. Since they are objects it does not make much sense to get them from the container. Think about using a data access technology like Entity Framework, it would not make sense to get those objects from the container. From what I can tell, this is a similar case.