I had been trying to run a data science script while using the custom actions of Rasa chatbot framework. Below is the class through which I'm executing this custom action
class ActionPlotGraph(Action):
def name(self) -> Text:
return "action_plot_returns"
def run(self, dispatcher: CollectingDispatcher,
tracker: Tracker,
domain: Dict[Text, Any]) -> List[Dict[Text, Any]]:
data = web.DataReader('AAPL',data_source='yahoo',start='01/01/2018', end ='01/01/2019')['Adj Close']
if data:
returns = data.pct_change()
first = returns[1].string()
ax = sns.lineplot(data= returns, x='Time', y= 'Returns')
dispatcher.utter_message(text=first)
return []
I had already imported all the dependency in python file. When I train and talk to chatbot which should trigger this, it gives out various errors. Questions:
1) Is something wrong with the code inside ActionPlotGraph class?
2) Is it the right method for running different codes inside Actions classes and returning particular values? Or we should keep the scripts separate?
Related
I'm very new to automation development, and currently starting to write an appium+pytest based Android app testing framework.
I managed to run tests on a connected device using this code, that seems to use unittest:
class demo(unittest.TestCase):
reportDirectory = 'reports'
reportFormat = 'xml'
dc = {}
driver = None
# testName = 'test_setup_tmotg_demo'
def setUp(self):
self.dc['reportDirectory'] = self.reportDirectory
self.dc['reportFormat'] = self.reportFormat
# self.dc['testName'] = self.testName
self.dc['udid'] = 'RF8MA2GW1ZF'
self.dc['appPackage'] = 'com.tg17.ud.internal'
self.dc['appActivity'] = 'com.tg17.ud.ui.splash.SplashActivity'
self.dc['platformName'] = 'android'
self.dc['noReset'] = 'true'
self.driver = webdriver.Remote('http://localhost:4723/wd/hub',self.dc)
# def test_function1():
# code
# def test_function2():
# code
# def test_function3():
# code
# etc...
def tearDown(self):
self.driver.quit()
if __name__ == '__main__':
unittest.main()
As you can see all the functions are currently within 'demo' class.
The intention is to create several test cases for each part of the app (for example: registration, main screen, premium subscription, etc.). That could sum up to hundreds of test cases eventually.
It seems to me that simply continuing listing them all in this same class would be messy and would give me a very limited control. However I didn't find any other way to arrange my tests while keeping the device connected via appium.
The question is what would be the right way to organize the project so that I can:
Set up the device with appium server
Run all the test suites in sequential order (registration, main screen, subscription, etc...).
Perform the cleaning... export results, disconnect device, etc.
I hope I described the issue clearly enough. Would be happy to elaborate if needed.
Well you have a lot of questions here so it might be good to split them up into separate threads. But first of all you can learn a lot about how Appium works by checking out the documentation here. And for the unittest framework here.
All Appium cares about is the capabilities file (or variable). So you can either populate it manually or white some helper function to do that for you. Here is a list of what can be used.
You can create as many test classes(or suites) as you want and add them together in any order you wish. This helps to break things up into manageable chunks. (See example below)
You will have to create some helper methods here as well, since Appium itself will not do much cleaning. You can use the adb command in the shell for managing android devices.
import unittest
from unittest import TestCase
# Create a Base class for common methods
class BaseTest(unittest.TestCase):
# setUpClass method will only be ran once, and not every suite/test
#classmethod
def setUpClass(cls) -> None:
# Init your driver and read the capabilites here
pass
#classmethod
def tearDownClass(cls) -> None:
# Do cleanup, close the driver, ...
pass
# Use the BaseTest class from before
# You can then duplicate this class for other suites of tests
class TestLogin(BaseTest):
#classmethod
def setUpClass(cls) -> None:
super(TestLogin, cls).setUpClass()
# Do things here that are needed only once (like loging in)
def setUp(self) -> None:
# This is executed before every test
pass
def testOne(self):
# Write your tests here
pass
def testTwo(self):
# Write your tests here
pass
def tearDown(self) -> None:
# This is executed after every test
pass
if __name__ == '__main__':
# Load the tests from the suite class we created
test_cases = unittest.defaultTestLoader.loadTestsFromTestCase(TestLogin)
# If you want do add more
test_cases.addTests(TestSomethingElse)
# Run the actual tests
unittest.TextTestRunner().run(test_cases)
I can use MongoDB with FastAPI either
with a global client: motor.motor_asyncio.AsyncIOMotorClient object, or else
by creating one during the startup event per this SO answer which refers to this "Real World Example".
However, I also want to use fastapi-users since it works nicely with MongoDB out of the box. The downside is it seems to only work with the first method of handling my DB client connection (ie global). The reason is that in order to configure fastapi-users, I have to have an active MongoDB client connection just so I can make the db object as shown below, and I need that db to then make the MongoDBUserDatabase object required by fastapi-users:
# main.py
app = FastAPI()
# Create global MongoDB connection
DATABASE_URL = "mongodb://user:paspsword#localhost/auth_db"
client = motor.motor_asyncio.AsyncIOMotorClient(DATABASE_URL, uuidRepresentation="standard")
db = client["my_db"]
# Set up fastapi_users
user_db = MongoDBUserDatabase(UserDB, db["users"])
cookie_authentication = CookieAuthentication(secret='lame secret' , lifetime_seconds=3600, name='cookiemonster')
fastapi_users = FastAPIUsers(
user_db,
[cookie_authentication],
User,
UserCreate,
UserUpdate,
UserDB,
)
After that point in the code, I can import the fastapi_users Routers. However, if I want to break up my project into FastAPI Routers of my own, I'm hosed because:
If I move the client creation to another module to be imported into both my app and my routers, then I have different clients in different event loops and get errors like RuntimeError: Task <Task pending name='Task-4' coro=<RequestResponseCycle.run_asgi() running at /usr/local/lib/python3.8/site-packages/uvicorn/protocols/http/h11_impl.py:389> cb=[set.discard()]> got Future <Future pending cb=[_chain_future.<locals>._call_check_cancel() at /usr/local/lib/python3.8/asyncio/futures.py:360]> attached to a different loop (touched on in this SO question)
If I user the solutions of the "Real World Example", then I get stuck on where to build my fastapi_users object in my code example: I can't do it in main.py because there's no db object yet.
I considered making the MongoDBUserDatabase object as part of the startup event code (ie within async def connect_to_mongo() from the Real World Example), but I'm not able to get that to work either since I can't see how to make it work.
How can I either
make a global MongoDB client and FastAPI-User object in a way that can be shared among my main app and several routers without "attached to a different loop" errors, or
create fancy wrapper classes and functions to set up FastAPI users with the startup trigger?
I don't think my solution is complete or correct, but I figured I'd post it in case it inspires any ideas, I'm stumped. I have run into the exact dilemma, almost seems like a design flaw..
I followed this MongoDB full example and named it main.py
At this point my app does not work. The server starts up but result results in the aforementioned "attached to a different loop" whenever trying to query the DB.
Looking for guidance, I stumbled upon the same "real world" example
In main.py added the startup and shudown event handlers
# Event handlers
app.add_event_handler("startup", create_start_app_handler(app=app))
app.add_event_handler("shutdown", create_stop_app_handler(app=app))
In dlw_api.db.events.py this:
import logging
from dlw_api.user import UserDB
from fastapi import FastAPI
from fastapi_users.db.mongodb import MongoDBUserDatabase
from motor.motor_asyncio import AsyncIOMotorClient
LOG = logging.getLogger(__name__)
DB_NAME = "dlwLocal"
USERS_COLLECTION = "users"
DATABASE_URI = "mongodb://dlw-mongodb:27017" # protocol://container_name:port
_client: AsyncIOMotorClient = None
_users_db: MongoDBUserDatabase = None
def get_users_db() -> MongoDBUserDatabase:
return _users_db
async def connect_to_db() -> None:
global _users_db
# logger.info("Connecting to {0}", repr(DATABASE_URL))
client = AsyncIOMotorClient(DATABASE_URI)
db = client[DB_NAME]
collection = db[USERS_COLLECTION]
_users_db = MongoDBUserDatabase(UserDB, collection)
LOG.info(f"Connected to {DATABASE_URI}")
async def close_db_connection(app: FastAPI) -> None:
_client.close()
LOG.info("Connection closed")
And dlw_api.events.py:
from typing import Callable
from fastapi import FastAPI
from dlw_api.db.events import close_db_connection, connect_to_db
from dlw_api.user import configure_user_auth_routes
from fastapi_users.authentication import CookieAuthentication
from dlw_api.db.events import get_users_db
COOKIE_SECRET = "THIS_NEEDS_TO_BE_SET_CORRECTLY" # TODO: <--|
COOKIE_LIFETIME_SECONDS: int = 3_600
COOKIE_NAME = "c-is-for-cookie"
# Auth stuff:
_cookie_authentication = CookieAuthentication(
secret=COOKIE_SECRET,
lifetime_seconds=COOKIE_LIFETIME_SECONDS,
name=COOKIE_NAME,
)
auth_backends = [
_cookie_authentication,
]
def create_start_app_handler(app: FastAPI) -> Callable:
async def start_app() -> None:
await connect_to_db(app)
configure_user_auth_routes(
app=app,
auth_backends=auth_backends,
user_db=get_users_db(),
secret=COOKIE_SECRET,
)
return start_app
def create_stop_app_handler(app: FastAPI) -> Callable:
async def stop_app() -> None:
await close_db_connection(app)
return stop_app
This doesn't feel correct to me, does this mean all routes that use Depends for user-auth have to be included on the server startup event handler??
The author (frankie567) of fastapi-users created a repl.it showing a solution of sorts. My discussion about this solution may provide more context but the key parts of the solution are:
Don't bother using FastAPI startup trigger along with Depends for your MongDB connectivity management. Instead, create a separate file (ie db.py) to create your DB connection and client object. Import this db object whenever needed, like your Routers, and then use it as a global.
Also create a separate users.py to do 2 things:
Create globally used fastapi_users = FastAPIUsers(...) object for use with other Routers to handle authorization.
Create a FastAPI.APIRouter() object and attach all the fastapi-user routers to it (router.include_router(...))
In all your other Routers, import both db and fastapi_users from the above as needed
Key: split your main code up into
a main.py which only import uvicorn and serves app:app.
an app.py which has your main FastAPI object (ie app) and which then attaches all our Routers, including the one from users.py with all the fastapi-users routers attached to it.
By splitting up code per 4 above, you avoid the "attached to different loop" error.
I faced similar issue, and all I have to do to get motor and fastapi run in the same loop is this:
client = AsyncIOMotorClient()
client.get_io_loop = asyncio.get_event_loop
I did not set on_startup or whatsoever.
I am using slick 3.2 code generation tool and I auto generated the code against my production database. In the generated code I can see
class BarActivity(_tableTag: Tag) extends profile.api.Table[BarActivityRow](_tableTag, Some("foo_prod"), "bar_activity") {
Here foo_prod is the database against which the code generator ran.
The problem is that for multiple environments my databases are named differently. So dev database is foo_dev and qa database is foo_qa.
I don't want to generate the database file each and every-time I switch environments. I want to use the same generated code across environments.
I think slick should have allowed us to specify the database name from the connection properties.
So with auto generated code, how do I write a problem which has two connections. One to read data from prod and second to write data to dev? Should I generate the code twice?
You can customize the output as you wish :
The default value of where you're looking at is in AbstractSourceCodeGenerator.scala -> TableClassDef trait, in the code method.
So, assuming you have a class like
class MyGenerator extends SourceCodeGenerator(model) {
you can add in it
override def Table = new Table(_) {
override def TableClass = new TableClassDef {
override def code = {
val prns = parents.map(" with " + _).mkString("")
s"""class $name(_tableTag: Tag) extends profile.api.Table[$elementType](_tableTag, ${hereGoesTheDatabaseNameAndTheTableNameComaSeparated})$prns {
${indent(body.map(_.mkString("\n")).mkString("\n\n"))}"""
}
}
}
In your case, you may want to have the variable hereGoesTheDatabaseNameAndTheTableNameComaSeparated fetch the database name from some config file or environment variable for example ?
Full disclaimer : I never customized this part myself, but I can't see a big reason this wouldn't work.
I am a Scala/PlayFramework noob here, so please be easy on me :).
I am trying to create an action (serving a GET request) so that when I enter the url in the browser, the browser should download the file. So far I have this:
def sepaCreditXml() = Action {
val data: SepaCreditTransfer = invoiceService.sepaCredit()
val content: HtmlFormat.Appendable = views.html.sepacredittransfer(data)
Ok(content)
}
What it does is basically show the XML in the browser (whereas I actually want it to download the file). Also, I have two problems with it:
I am not sure if using Play's templating "views.html..." is the best idea to create an XML template. Is it good/simple enough or should I use a different solution for this?
I have found Ok.sendFile in the Play's documentation. But it needs a java.io.File. I don't know how to create a File from HtmlFormat.Appendable. I would prefer to create a file in-memory, i.e. no new File("/tmp/temporary.xml").
EDIT: Here SepaCreditTransfer is a case class holding some data. Nothing special.
I think it's quite normal for browsers to visualize XML instead of downloading it. Have you tried to use the application/force-download content type header, like this?
def sepaCreditXml() = Action {
val data: SepaCreditTransfer = invoiceService.sepaCredit()
val content: HtmlFormat.Appendable = views.html.sepacredittransfer(data)
Ok(content).withHeaders("Content-Type" -> "application/force-download")
}
I'm attempting to write a Plone add-on that requires an "Add new" form. So far, I've managed to get this working very nicely using plone.directives.form.SchemaAddForm. I have the '##create-snippet' view registered in configure.zcml, and it works perfectly when I view the page normally.
However, the ultimate goal of this project is to get this add form into a TinyMCE popup window. I've created a working TinyMCE plugin for another, irrelevant portion of the add-on, and gotten that working well. However, when I try to navigate to my "##create-snippets" view in a tinyMCE window, I get:
LocationError: (Products.Five.metaclass.DirectoryResource2 object at 0x107162fd0, 'main_template')
My understanding of this issue is that, essentially, the SchemaAddForm class (or one of it's super classes, to be exact) wraps the form with the main Plone main_template when it renders the form. Since TinyMCE windows are their own, isolated little worlds, the template isn't available, and, therefore, cannot be rendered....or something like that? Please correct me if I'm way off.
What I really want to know, is if it's possible to set things up so only the form itself will render, without using the main_template? I would REALLY like to be able to take advantage of the schema-based forms (and their built-in validation), but still be able to keep everything within a TinyMCE window.
I've toyed around with creating my own ViewPageTemplateFile() template, and getting the form to render (somehow?) within it, but frankly, I have no idea how....or if that's even possible.
Please feel free to ask for more information if there's something I've omitted. I'm kinda new to this type of Plone development.
The code generating the form:
from Products.Five.browser import BrowserView
from uwosh.snippets.snippet import SnippetManager
from plone.directives.form import SchemaAddForm
import zope.interface
from plone.autoform.form import AutoExtensibleForm
import zope.schema
from plone.directives import form
import z3c
from Products.statusmessages.interfaces import IStatusMessage
_ = zope.i18nmessageid.MessageFactory(u'uwosh.snippets')
class ISnippet(form.Schema):
title = zope.schema.TextLine(
title=u'Title',
description=u'The title to associate with the snippet.',
required=True)
description = zope.schema.TextLine(
title=u'Description',
description=u'A short explanation of the snippet.',
required=True)
body = zope.schema.Text(
title=u'Body',
description=u'The actual content to be rendered on the page.',
required=True)
class SnippetForm(SchemaAddForm):
schema = ISnippet
#z3c.form.button.buttonAndHandler(_('Save'), name='save')
def handleAdd(self, action):
data, errors = self.extractData()
if errors:
self.status = self.formErrorsMessage
return
obj = self.createAndAdd(data)
if obj is not None:
# mark only as finished if we get the new object
self._finishedAdd = True
IStatusMessage(self.request).addStatusMessage(_(u"Snippet saved"), "info")
#z3c.form.button.buttonAndHandler(_(u'Cancel'), name='cancel')
def handleCancel(self, action):
IStatusMessage(self.request).addStatusMessage(_(u"Add New Snippet operation cancelled"), "info")
self.request.response.redirect(self.nextURL())
def create(self, data):
sm = SnippetManager()
#TODO:
#Include support for different folders from this form.
snippet = sm.createSnippet(data['title'], None ,data)
return snippet
def add(self, object):
#Since, for now, snippets are based upon ATDocuments, their creation is fairly staight-forward.
#So, we don't really need separate Add/Create steps.
return
def nextURL(self):
return self.context.absolute_url() + '/##create-snippet'