The documentation for Autofac has a section for registering components with XML or JSON but it relies on Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration. Is there a way to do without without loading the string into that extension first?
My environment is based on the latest Xamarin.Forms and Autofac.
Cheers,
Luiz
The config mechanism provided uses that extension. If you don't want Microsoft. Extensions.Configuration then you'll need to roll your own configuration mechanism.
Related
I have my custom rule, let's say with AEM-1 key. So, as it is done here, I make my AEM-1.html resource file with some simple html content and it does not get's picked up by SonarQube 5.1. It refuses to start, because no description is provided for the rule.
I tried different packages names, tried to look for convention in source code etc. What's missing? Is there any documentation on that?
The naming convention is org/sonar/l10n/{plugin key}_{language}/rules/{repository key}/{rule key}.html.
It was documented in http://docs.sonarqube.org/display/DEV/Internationalization at the time rule descriptions supported localization. That's not the case anymore since version 4.2, but these HTML bundles are still supported.
The correct way since version 4.3 is to use the low-level API org.sonar.api.server.rule.RulesDefinition. It allows you to implement any kind over layer over it (xml, json, annotations, ...).
We have a GWT app that exposes an API using Google Cloud Endpoints. As we use objectify we can not expose the Key tag to the API. For that we use the ApiResourceProperty in order to make the API ignore the field, but if we do that the GWT compilation fails.
I have tried everything, from using the exclude from source in the gwt.xml to using the #gwtincompatible
So... is there a way to ignore the ApiResourceProperty.class in the GWT compilation?
Any other idea? If not I would have to duplicate my entities for the API
Thanks in advance
The only option I had was to create custom DTOs for the API.
I'm using ASP.Net MVC 4 RTM Web API. I have a controller action with a parameter that I'd like to populate via custom model binding. To achieve this, I created a class that derives from System.Web.Http.Controllers.HttpParameterBinding that sets the value of this parameter. I then created an attribute class that derives from System.Web.Http.ParameterBindingAttribute which I use to decorate the parameter on my controller action.
This is all working great, my HttpParameterBinding class is populating the action parameter correctly. The problem I have is that my custom parameter binding class has a dependency that I'd like resolved via my IoC container (Unity). Is there a way to override how Web API creates HttpParameterBinding instances so that I can build up my custom binding class dependency from Unity? I was able to do something similar for a filter attribute by creating a custom filter provider that uses Unity's BuildUp method to populate dependencies, however I'm not seeing anything similar for Web API's HttpParameterBindings.
In general: to use IoC / Unity in the Web API you need to set it up seperately.
Try downloading the nuget package Unity.WebApi and see if that helps!
Take a look at this article: Parameter Binding in WebAPI
It walks through a couple different options from Converters to Binders to BinderProviders. It sounds like you may be able to write a custom ModelBinderProvider which knows how to provide your dependency. If that isn't high enough in the chain you can look at replacing the default IActionValueBinder service. It's a DefaultActionValueBinder instance, which you can extend or simply re-implement.
I also highly recommend downloading the WebAPI source code, as it's been an incredible help for these issues as I've run into them. Here's the WebAPI source code. I recommend downloading it so you can open it in VS for easy navigation.
Feel free to check out FlitBit too (It's very modular, don't let the number of packages scare you off)! I'm working on a WebAPI package for supporting FlitBit, specifically FlitBit.IoC and FlitBit.Dto. I'll add an update if I work out my IoC issue, since it's very similar to yours.
I like to add columns accounts.name and assigned_username to the exporting CSV on the Calls module. I can do that by editing the function create_export_query on the modules/Calls/Call.php
But I want this to be done on upgrade safe manner. I am using SugarCRM Pro 6.2 version
Thanks in advance
To my knowledge, it is currently not possible to "override"/extend any sugarBean classes. Currently SugarCRM only facilitates upgrade-safe customizing to vardefs, languages, shortcuts, layouts, web services, and controllers+controller methods.
Metadata customizing: documentation
Web Services: documentation
Controller customizing: documentation
I'd properly make a custom module, which mimicks or extends the call module's export function in order to make it upgrade safe. (documentation)
I'm trying to build a small application (ASP.NET MVC) that uses the plugin architecture. Along with Castle ActiveRecord Integration Facility. And I wish to let each plugin configure its own ActiveRecord behaviors. Like database connection string, proxy, etc..
However, I couldn't find a way to set multiple configurations without the use of web.config. The idea is to make this programmatically.
My goal is for each plugin in this system, if it defines its own ActiveRecord settings, the main application can set up next to ActiveRecordFacility these behaviors.
has someone do something like that?
P.S.: sorry, bad grammar...google translate...;P
You can set up the ActiveRecord configuration programmatically using InPlaceConfigurationSource (lots of examples around), then after initializing ActiveRecord (in your own code), call the ActiveRecordFacility with the skipARInitialization flag. e.g.:
container.AddFacility("ar", new ActiveRecordFacility(true));
This tells the facility not to try to initialize ActiveRecord, so it picks up the existing configuration.
Ok...the example in Lostechies works great. (link text)
Mauricio, thanks for the tip!