This just happened today even if I use the same version, no changes in code.
When call PUT /__admin/mappings/{uuid}, the class that implements MappingsSource.save( StubMapping stubMapping ) is usually called but this method is NOT called today.
The save() still works fine after stopping recording
Could you please suggest what is wrong?
Related
I would like to populate the UI when I load a scene, with the correct data, instead of placeholders.
When I call "LoadSceneAsync", what would be the first object that is called, so I can fill the UI label with the correct data? I know that there is a scene GameObject, but I am not sure if that would fit my needs.
I am looking for some sort of constructor, called when a new scene object is loaded; to plug in my setup function.
You say
Indeed I did use "onlevelwasloaded" but the UI element may not be there, ready to go, when I invoke it, which lead to errors
That would be an incredibly sever bug in Unity! :)
Could it be that you are mixing-up Awake and Start somewhere?
One way to think of it is once you call Start, you know all the Awake have already run.
When I call "LoadSceneAsync", what would be the first object that is called, so I can fill the UI label with the correct data
You are still within the same frame.
Once you see LoadSceneAsync you can be absolutely assured everything is Awake 'd.
Or indeed once you use Start you can be absolutely assured everything is Awake 'd.
1) could it be that in some of your UI elements (or whatever) you are doing something in Start which you should do in Awake?
2) if (for some reason) you want to "wait until the next frame", perhaps just during development - then do that, wait a frame. You'll see a flicker, but if that's what you want to do (for some reason) do that.
3) note that if you mean you want to go to the net to get something, well of course you have to wait frames (use Update/coroutine) until the information comes back from the net, obviously. (How else could it be?)
Note that in practice, one should be using UnityEngine.Events.UnityEvent everywhere.
Maybe this is what you are looking for http://docs.unity3d.com/ScriptReference/MonoBehaviour.OnLevelWasLoaded.html
Relying on Unity internal functioning is not always the way to go. Particularly when dealing with RESTApi (which is somehow what you are dealing with here).
You cannot assume one object will be ready before another except if you control it.
Add a Controller script that uses Awake. In the Awake, call all the methods you are needing and use some callback to generate secondary code when primary is ready.
public class MyController: MonoBehaviour{
private ServerRequestController serverCtrl = null;
private UIController uiCtrl = null;
private void Awake(){
serverCtrl = this.gameObject.AddComponent<ServerRequestController>();
uiCtrl =this.gameObject.AddComponent<UIController>();
serverCtrl.GetData(uiCtrl.SetUI);
}
}
public class UIController:MonoBehaviour{
public void SetUI(Data data)
{
SetTopImage(data.topImage);
SetBottomImage(data.bottomImage);
// And so on
}
}
public class ServerRequestController:MonoBehaviour{
public void GetData(Action onCompletion){
// This may be a coroutine if you fetch from server
Data data = GetDataFromSomewhere();
// At this point, your data is ready
onCompletion(data);
}
}
Thanks to this, you are now able to know exactly when a piece of code is ready.
A ValueAwareEditor has a method void onPropertyChange(java.lang.String... paths), about which the javadoc says: "Notifies the Editor that one or more value properties have changed."
When exactly is this method called? Is it the duty of the EditorDriver to call this method? Or do I have to implement code that calls this method myself?
Or is it simply not implemented yet at all, which is suggested by this question: GWT editor onPropertyChange.
That method is never ever called by the two built-in editor drivers (git grep onPropertyChange returns only method declarations), so I guess we can say that this is "simply not implemented yet at all".
Note that EditorDelegate#subscribe() is implemented in RequestFactoryEditorDriver using the alternate approach to comunicating change: it'll listen to EntityProxyChange events and will RequestFactory#find() the proxy back when changed, and then update the editor in-place, notifying ValueAwareEditors and LeafValueEditors via their setValue().
subscribe() is a no-op for the SimpleBeanEditorDriver.
I'm using GWTP, adding a Contract layer to abstract the knowledge between Presenter and View, and I'm pretty satisfied of the result with GWTP.
I'm testing my presenters with Mockito.
But as time passed, I found it was hard to maintain a clean presenter with its tests.
There are some refactoring stuff I did to improve that, but I was still not satisfied.
I found the following to be the heart of the matter :
My presenters need often asynchronous call, or generally call to objects method with a callback to continue my presenter flow (they are usually nested).
For example :
this.populationManager.populate(new PopulationCallback()
{
public void onPopulate()
{
doSomeStufWithTheView(populationManager.get());
}
});
In my tests, I ended to verify the population() call of the mocked PopulationManager object. Then to create another test on the doSomeStufWithTheView() method.
But I discovered rather quickly that it was bad design : any change or refactoring ended to broke a lot of my tests, and forced me to create from start others, even though the presenter functionality did not change !
Plus I didn't test if the callback was effectively what I wanted.
So I tried to use mockito doAnswer method to do not break my presenter testing flow :
doAnswer(new Answer(){
public Object answer(InvocationOnMock invocation) throws Throwable
{
Object[] args = invocation.getArguments();
((PopulationCallback)args[0]).onPopulate();
return null;
}
}).when(this.populationManager).populate(any(PopulationCallback.class));
I factored the code for it to be less verbose (and internally less dependant to the arg position) :
doAnswer(new PopulationCallbackAnswer())
.when(this.populationManager).populate(any(PopulationCallback.class));
So while mocking the populationManager, I could still test the flow of my presenter, basically like that :
#Test
public void testSomeStuffAppends()
{
// Given
doAnswer(new PopulationCallbackAnswer())
.when(this.populationManager).populate(any(PopulationCallback.class));
// When
this.myPresenter.onReset();
// Then
verify(populationManager).populate(any(PopulationCallback.class)); // That was before
verify(this.myView).displaySomething(); // Now I can do that.
}
I am wondering if it is a good use of the doAnswer method, or if it is a code smell, and a better design can be used ?
Usually, my presenters tend to just use others object (like some Mediator Pattern) and interact with the view. I have some presenter with several hundred (~400) lines of code.
Again, is it a proof of bad design, or is it normal for a presenter to be verbose (because its using others objects) ?
Does anyone heard of some project which uses GWTP and tests its presenter cleanly ?
I hope I explained in a comprehensive way.
Thank you in advance.
PS : I'm pretty new to Stack Overflow, plus my English is still lacking, if my question needs something to be improved, please tell me.
You could use ArgumentCaptor:
Check out this blog post fore more details.
If I understood correctly you are asking about design/architecture.
This is shouldn't be counted as answer, it's just my thoughts.
If I have followed code:
public void loadEmoticonPacks() {
executor.execute(new Runnable() {
public void run() {
pack = loadFromServer();
savePackForUsageAfter();
}
});
}
I usually don't count on executor and just check that methods does concrete job by loading and saving. So the executor here is just instrument to prevent long operations in the UI thread.
If I have something like:
accountManager.setListener(this);
....
public void onAccountEvent(AccountEvent event) {
....
}
I will check first that we subscribed for events (and unsubscribed on some destroying) as well I would check that onAccountEvent does expected scenarios.
UPD1. Probably, in example 1, better would be extract method loadFromServerAndSave and check that it's not executed on UI thread as well check that it does everything as expected.
UPD2. It's better to use framework like Guava Bus for events processing.
We are using this doAnswer pattern in our presenter tests as well and usually it works just fine. One caveat though: If you test it like this you are effectively removing the asynchronous nature of the call, that is the callback is executed immediately after the server call is initiated.
This can lead to undiscovered race conditions. To check for those, you could make this a two-step process: when calling the server,the answer method only saves the callback. Then, when it is appropriate in your test, you call sometinh like flush() or onSuccess() on your answer (I would suggest making a utility class for this that can be reused in other circumstances), so that you can control when the callback for the result is really called.
I currently have an event trigger firing a custom trigger action.
The action passes back a EventArgs type of object to the view's view-model.
This is all well and good when I run the code it works perfectly. However, when I come to test this portion of code it all goes a bit rubbish.
As stated We are using an MVVM type pattern so I'm testing the 'Doing' end of the event trigger in my view-model and what I want to do is create a 'mocked' EventArgs object to pass into the execute method of my command under test. However it requires a RoutedEvent as it's ID property as stated above and I don't have access to it's constructor!
Cannot Access Internal Constructor for 'RoutedEvent' here.
Has anyone got any ideas? The code converage in test is more important than the current implimentation so if this is thought to be 'untestable', then I can make changes.
I have answered my own Question I think.
Casting the object passed back from the view at an earlier point means that the object I am passing to the methods under test is more easily created.
This is what I have now for the method under test.
public void DoItemsChanged(IList param)
Before I had
public void DoItemsChanged(object param)
Where the param is a SelectedItemCollection (previously a RoutedEventArgs, but now I use the IvokeCommandAction on the event trigger in the view, passign the SelectedItems). The param is now more easily passed into the method for the test and the code it much more descriptive as well. So it's all good for everyone.
I've been going through the documentation for creating Prism applications and setting up the Shell seems to be split into 2 methods, CreateShell() and InitializeShell()
For CreateShell I simply have:
protected override DependencyObject CreateShell()
{
return ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<Shell>();
}
The documentation says that code is needed in the IntializeShell() method to ensure it is ready to be displayed. The following is given as an example:
protected override void InitializeShell()
{
Application.Current.MainWindow = (Window)this.Shell;
Application.Current.MainWindow.Show();
}
I have noticed however that if I omit the first line and just call the Show() method it seems to work (MainWindow already appears to have Shell assigned to it). Can you tell me why this is the case, and why we still need to explicity set the MainWindow property here?
Also as I did not specifically register Shell to an interface within the container, how is it able to resolve Shell in CreateShell()?
Question 1: Why does just calling Show() seem to work and why is Application.Current.MainWindow seem to be populated?
There are a few things you should check here. In a typical WPF application, the type for the main window can be specified in the App.xaml. If it is specified, WPF will instantiate one of those for you. This is not desirable because WPF won't use your container to instantiate your shell and any dependencies won't be resolved.
When you run that first line of code in InitializeShell, you'd be replacing the WPF-instantiated Shell object with the one you manually instantiated.
I looked at the code for the MEF and Unity bootstrappers and I don't see anywhere that MainWindow is being set, but I don't know if you might have customized the base bootstrappers, so that's something else to look for.
Show() works because you are simply showing the window you instantiated and the WPF-instantiated one isn't shown. This is my theory, but without seeing your code, it'd be tough to say for sure.
Question 2: How can Unity resolve something that hasn't been registered?
Unity can always resolve a concrete type, regardless of registration. It cannot resolve non-concrete classes that haven't been mapped to a concrete type. This is why Resolve<Shell> works, but Resolve<IMyInterface> doesn't unless you register a type.