Using Vert.x JavaScript (3.8.4), I want to dynamically load a JAR file at runtime. This is necessary because that file might not exist when my Vert.x application gets started. Ideally, I would like to be able to use code like this:
// load custom JAR file
requireJar("path/to/dynamic.jar");
// use class from dynamically loaded package
var instance = new com.mydynamicpackage.MyCustomClass();
How can I achieve this?
You might find this answer to be helpful:
How to access external JAR files from JavaScript using Rhino and Eclipse?
Another approach that is valid would be to provide the jar with other means, i.e. not via a javascript implementation, to check afterwards, if it is available and then deal with the case if it is not.
java.lang.Class.forName( 'com.mydynamicpackage.MyCustomClass' )
This will throw an error, if MyCustomClass does not exist.
Loading jars at runtime might not be a good idea if you cannot determine they are loaded from a not trustworthy source. This is at least true for the java world.
Based on this answer, I have created the following JavaScript function for dynamically loading a class from a JAR file:
var requireJavaClass=(function(){
var method=java.net.URLClassLoader.class.getDeclaredMethod("addURL",java.net.URL.class);
method.setAccessible(true);
var cache={};
var ClassLoader=java.lang.ClassLoader;
var File=java.io.File;
return function(classname,jarpath){
var c=cache[classname];
if (c) return c;
if (jarpath) {
var cl=ClassLoader.getSystemClassLoader();
method.invoke(cl,new File(jarpath).toURI().toURL());
cl.loadClass(classname);
}
return cache[classname]=Java.type(classname);
}
})();
The equivalent to the snippet I posted in the my question would be:
var MyCustomClass=requireJavaClass("com.mydynamicpackage.MyCustomClass","path/to/dynamic.jar");
var instance = new MyCustomClass();
So far, I have only tested this with Vert.x 3.8.5 running in JRE8, i.e. I can't say if this also works in older Vert.x versions or with JRE9+.
I just came across an exception while trying something with Manatee.Trello. I was trying to create a Func like this:
var criteria = new List<string>
{
"(put a board ID here)"
};
var query = new Func<IEnumerable<Manatee.Trello.Member>, IEnumerable<Manatee.Trello.Board>>(
members =>
{
foreach (var member in members)
{
var selectedBoards = member.Boards.Where(b => criteria.Contains(b.Id, StringComparer.Ordinal));
boards.AddRange(selectedBoards); // Exception thrown here
}
return boards;
});
But the line marked above throws this exception:
System.TypeLoadException
{"Method 'get_StatusCode' in type 'Manatee.Trello.RestSharp.RestSharpResponse' from assembly 'Manatee.Trello.RestSharp, Version=0.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=783b036be1eaf5a7' does not have an implementation.":"Manatee.Trello.RestSharp.RestSharpResponse"}
I'm not sure if this is something I'm doing wrong with my code, or some kind of setup error I made in setting up my project with Manatee.Trello, perhaps the NuGet packages are jacked up...
Any tips on where to start looking would be much appreciated.
This situation was remedied by changing from the RestSharp provider included in Manatee.Trello to the provider in Manatee.Trello.WebApi. As I discovered in the library's documentation:
Manatee.Trello.RestSharp is backed by (you guessed it) RestSharp.
There have been some issues with the .Net 4.5+ versions, so it's
suggested you don't use this one unless you are using .Net 4.0 or
earlier.
Indeed, I am using .Net 4.5.2.
I have been using Eloquent as a standalone package in Slim Framework 2 successfully.
But now that I want to make use of Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB since I need to show some statistics by getting the info from 2 tables and using a Left Join and a Counter from the database like this:
use Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB;
$projectsbyarea = DB::table('projects AS p')
->select(DB::raw('DISTINCT a.area, COUNT(a.area) AS Quantity'))
->leftJoin('areas AS a','p.area_id','=','a.id')
->where('p.status','in_process')
->where('a.area','<>','NULL')
->orderBy('p.area_id');
I get the following error:
Type: RuntimeException
Message: A facade root has not been set.
File: ...\vendor\illuminate\support\Facades\Facade.php
Line: 206
How can I solve it?
So far I have found out, in this link that I need to create a new app container and then bind it to the Facade. But I haven't found out how to make it work.
This is how I started the rest of my Eloquent and working fine:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as Capsule;
$capsule = new Capsule();
$capsule->addConnection([
'my' => $app->config->get('settings'),
/* more settings ...*/
]);
/*booting Eloquent*/
$capsule->bootEloquent();
How do I fix this?
Fixed
As #user5972059 said, I had to add $capsule->setAsGlobal();//This is important to make work the DB (Capsule) just above $capsule->bootEloquent();
Then, the query is executed like this:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as Capsule;
$projectsbyarea = Capsule::table('projects AS p')
->select(DB::raw('DISTINCT a.area, COUNT(a.area) AS Quantity'))
->leftJoin('areas AS a','p.area_id','=','a.id')
->where('p.status','in_process')
->where('a.area','<>','NULL')
->orderBy('p.area_id')
->get();
You have to change your code to:
$Capsule = new Capsule;
$Capsule->addConnection(config::get('database'));
$Capsule->setAsGlobal(); //this is important
$Capsule->bootEloquent();
And at the beginning of your class file you have to import:
use Illuminate\Database\Capsule\Manager as DB;
I have just solved this problem by uncommenting $app->withFacades(); in bootstrap/app.php
Had the same issue with laravel 8. I replaced
use PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase;
with:
use Tests\TestCase;
Try uncommenting in app.php $app->withFacades();
Do not forget to call parent::setUp(); before.
fails
public function setUp(): void {
Config::set('something', true);
}
works
public function setUp(): void {
parent::setUp();
Config::set('something', true);
}
One random problem using phpUnit tests for laravel is that the laravel facades have not been initialized when testing.
Instead of using the standard PHPUnit TestCase class
class MyTestClass extends PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase
one can use
class UserTest extends Illuminate\Foundation\Testing\TestCase
and this problem is solved.
I got this error after running:
$ php artisan config:cache
The solution for me was to delete the /bootstrap/cache/config.php file. I'm running Laravel 5.5.
The seems to arise in multiple situation, and not just about facades.
I received the following message while running tests using PHPUnit v.9.5.4, PHP v.8.0.3 and Lumen v. 8.2.2:
PHP Fatal error: Uncaught RuntimeException: A facade root has not
been set. in path_to_project/vendor/illuminate/support/Facades/Facade.php:258
And that happened although I had apparently already configured my app.php to enable facades ($app->withFacades();), still I received this error message whenever I tried to run tests using Illuminate\Support\Facades\DB. Unfortunately, none of the other answers helped me.
This error was actually been thrown due to my configs in phpunit.xml, which didn't point to my app.php file, where I actually enabled facades.
I just had to change
<phpunit (...OTHER_PARAMS_HERE) bootstrap="vendor/autoload.php">
to
<phpunit (...OTHER_PARAMS_HERE) bootstrap="bootstrap/app.php">
Hope it helps.
wrong way
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Activity', function($app)
{
new Activity;
});
}
right way 👍
public function register()
{
$this->app->bind('Activity', function($app)
{
return new Activity;
});
}
---------------------------------- don't forget return
Upgrade version for php, I encountered this error while calling the interface.
$ php artisan config:cache
Deleting the /bootstrap/cache/config.php file is a very effective way.
In my project, I managed to fix this issue by using Laravel Dependency Injection when instantiating the object. Previously I had it like this:
$class = new MyClass(
new Client(),
env('client_id', 'test'),
Config::get('myapp.client_secret')
);
The same error message happened when I used Laravel env() and Config().
I introduced the Client and env in the AppServiceProvider like this:
$this->app->bind(
MyClass::class,
function () {
return new MyClass(
new Client(),
env('client_id', 'test')),
Config::get('myapp.client_secret')
);
}
and then instantiated the class like this:
$class = app(MyClass::class);
See more from https://laravel.com/docs/5.8/container .
In my case, for a while a ran a PHP project in PHP version 8, and that time I used some PHP 8 features like param definition and method's multiple return type declarations supported by only PHP 8 and above. When I downgraded from PHP 8 to PHP 7.4 I faced this issue. After removing the return types and param hinting the problems are gone.
Tested on Laravel 8.78
tests/bootstrap.php
<?php
use Illuminate\Foundation\Bootstrap\RegisterFacades;
use Illuminate\Foundation\Bootstrap\LoadConfiguration;
require_once __DIR__ . '/../vendor/autoload.php';
$app = require_once __DIR__ . '/../bootstrap/app.php';
(new LoadConfiguration())->bootstrap($app);// <------- Required for next line
(new RegisterFacades())->bootstrap($app);// <------- Add this line
Here is yet another instance of this error, happened to me after upgrading Laravel 8 to 9.
I had feature tests with a #dataProvider to supply data to those tests. Some of the data supplied by the data provider methods came from an application service. It was being initialised like this:
/**
* #dataProvider myDataProvider
*/
public function testSomeStuff(...)
{
...
}
public function myDataProvider()
{
$myService = app(Service::class); // This is trouble
return [
['test1_data' => $myService::SOME_CONSTANT],
[...],
...
];
}
This worked under Laravel 8, but not in Laravel 9. All other solutions listed in this SO thread were checked and were correctly set up.
The problem is that the application is not being inititialised until after the data provider method is run. It was presumably initialised before this stage in the Laravel 8 install. So app(Service::class) was failing due to it using facades internally.
One workaround could be to force the application to initialise earlier, in the data provider function: $this->createApplication(). I would not recommend this due to potential side effects of the test parts running in the wrong order, though it does appear to work when I tried it.
Best solution is to avoid accessing any part of the application functionality in the data provider methods. In my case it was easy to replace $myService::SOME_CONSTANT with MyService::SOME_CONSTANT after making sure those constants were public.
Hopefully this will help somebody suddenly hitting this problem running feature tests after a Laravel 9 upgrade.
If you recently upgrade Laravel on Homestead & VirtualBox environment or do not find any reason that causing please be sure your Vagrant is up to date.
Referance
I had Taylor lock this thread. The past several replies have restated the solution, which is to Upgrade to Virtualbox 6.x, the thread is locked to prevent other issues that are not related from being dogpiled on here.
#melvin's answer above works correctly.
In case someone is wondering about it, the mistake people do is to choose Yes when VSCode asks them if they are making a Unit Test. Remember, Unit Tests should really be unit tests, independent of other application features (models, factories, routes; basically anything that would require the Laravel app to be fired up). In most scenarios, people really actually want to make Feature Tests and therefore should answer No to the above question. A feature test inherits from Tests\TestCase class (which takes care of firing up Laravel app before running the test) unlike unit tests that inherit from the class PHPUnit\Framework\TestCase which use just PHPUnit and are therefore much faster.
credit with thanks to #Aken Roberts's answer here.
From Laravel Documentation: Generally, most of your tests should be feature tests. These types of tests provide the most confidence that your system as a whole is functioning as intended.
I have a problem with tests becoming unstable under NCrunch. It looks like it has to do with some shadow copying issue. My test goes something like this
class SaveViewSettings : ISaveSettings
{
public void SaveSettings()
{
Properties.View.Default.Save();
}
}
[TestFixture]
// ReSharper disable once InconsistentNaming
class SaveViewSettings_Should
{
[Test]
public void Save_Settings()
{
var ctx = Properties.View.Default;
var sut = new SaveViewSettings();
ctx.LeftSplitter = 12.34;
sut.SaveSettings();
ctx.Reload();
ctx.LeftSplitter.Should().Be(12.34);
}
}
When reloading the settings using ctx.Reload() i get
System.Configuration.ConfigurationErrorsException : ...
----> System.Configuration.ConfigurationErrorsException...
(C:\...\AppData\Local\Remco_Software_Ltd\nCrunch.TestRunner.AppDom_Url_q2piuozo0uftcc2pz5zv15hpilzfpoqk\[version]\user.config...)
A similar problem has been raised on the NCrunch forum about 3 months ago: Unrecognized configuration section userSettings
You might get similar errors with NCrunch when working on multiple solutions with application settings.
I think this might root down to NCrunch always using the same product and user name when shadow building so that all configuration settings are mapped to the same user.config file path.
It seems that by now there is no known solution to this. A work around is to manually delete the user config in
%LOCALAPPDATA%\Remco_Software_Ltd\nCrunch.TestRunner.AppDom_...\user.config`.
Note that the usual way to do this ctx.Reset() might fail as well, so you really have to locate and delete the user.config yourself using ConfigurationManager.
I have automated this work around by adding the following code which stabilizes the test with NCrunch
[Test]
public void Save_Settings()
{
#if NCRUNCH
// Every once in a while NCrunch throws ConfigurationErrorException, cf.:
// - http://forum.ncrunch.net/yaf_postsm7538_Unrecognized-configuration-section-userSettings.aspx
// - http://www.codeproject.com/Articles/30216/Handling-Corrupt-user-config-Settings
// - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2903610/visual-studio-reset-user-settings-when-debugging
// - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9038070/how-do-i-get-the-location-of-the-user-config-file-in-programmatically
var config = ConfigurationManager.OpenExeConfiguration(ConfigurationUserLevel.PerUserRoamingAndLocal);
if (File.Exists(config.FilePath))
File.Delete(config.FilePath);
#endif
...
Over the past few years i came to consider .NET configuration settings as a kind of legacy feature. It was introduced with .NET 2.0 and was great at the time but it has some issues that you need to be aware of. Maybe it is a good idea to look for alternatives or abstractions like e.g. HumbleConfig which makes it easy to switch.
Hi All i have a question regarding NUnit Extension (2.5.10).
What i am trying to do is write some additional test info to the
database. For that i have created NUnit extension using Event
Listeners.
The problem i am experiencing is that public void
TestFinished(TestResult result) method is being called twice at
runtime. And my code which writes to the database is in this method
and that leaves me with duplicate entries in the database. The
question is: Is that the expected behaviour? Can i do something about
it?
The extension code is below. Thanks.
using System;
using NUnit.Core;
using NUnit.Core.Extensibility;
namespace NuinitExtension
{
[NUnitAddinAttribute(Type = ExtensionType.Core,
Name = "Database Addin",
Description = "Writes test results to the database.")]
public class MyNunitExtension : IAddin, EventListener
{
public bool Install(IExtensionHost host)
{
IExtensionPoint listeners = host.GetExtensionPoint("EventListeners");
if (listeners == null)
return false;
listeners.Install(this);
return true;
}
public void RunStarted(string name, int testCount){}
public void RunFinished(TestResult result){}
public void RunFinished(Exception exception){}
public void TestStarted(TestName testName){}
public void TestFinished(TestResult result)
{
// this is just sample data
SqlHelper.SqlConnectAndWRiteToDatabase("test", test",
2.0, DateTime.Now);
}
public void SuiteStarted(TestName testName){}
public void SuiteFinished(TestResult result){}
public void UnhandledException(Exception exception){}
public void TestOutput(TestOutput testOutput){}
}
}
I have managed to fix the issue by simply removing my extension
assembly from NUnit 2.5.10\bin\net-2.0\addins folder. At the moment
everything works as expected but i am not sure how. I thought that you
have to have the extension/addin assembly inside the addins folder.
I am running tests by opening a solution via NUnit.exe. My extension
project is part of the solution i am testing. I have also raised this issue with NUnit guys and got the following explanation:
Most likely, your addin was being loaded twice. In order to make it easier to test addins, NUnit searches each test assembly for addins to be loaded, in addition to searching the addins directory. Normally, when you are confident that your addin works, you should remove it from the test assembly and install it in the addins folder. This makes it available to all tests that are run using NUnit. OTOH, if you really only want the addin to apply for a certain project, then you can leave it in the test assembly and not install it as a permanent addin.
http://groups.google.com/group/nunit-discuss/browse_thread/thread/c9329129fd803cb2/47672f15e7cc05d1#47672f15e7cc05d1
Not sure this answer is strictly relevant but might be useful.
I was having a play around with the NUnit library recently to read NUnit tests in so they could easily be transfered over to our own in-house acceptance testing framework.
It turns out we probably wont stick with this but thought it might be useful to share my experiences figuring out how to use the NUnit code:
It is different in that it doesn't get run by the NUnit console or Gui Runner but just by our own console app.
public class NUnitTestReader
{
private TestHarness _testHarness;
public void AddTestsTo(TestHarness testHarness)
{
_testHarness = testHarness;
var package = new TestPackage(Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly().Location){AutoBinPath = true};
CoreExtensions.Host.InitializeService();
var testSuiteBuilder = new TestSuiteBuilder();
var suite = testSuiteBuilder.Build(package);
AddTestsFrom(suite);
}
private void AddTestsFrom(Test node)
{
if (!node.IsSuite)
AddTest(node);
else
{
foreach (Test test in node.Tests)
AddTestsFrom(test);
}
}
private void AddTest(Test node)
{
_testHarness.AddTest(new WrappedNUnitTest(node, TestFilter.Empty));
}
}
The above reads NUnit tests in from the current assembly wraps them up and then adds them to our inhouse test harness. I haven't included these classes but they're not really important to understanding how the NUnit code works.
The really useful bit of information here is the static to "InitialiseService" this took quite a bit of figuring out but is necessary to get the basic set of test readers loaded in NUnit. You need to be a bit careful when looking at the tests in NUnit aswell as it includes failing tests (which I assume dont work because of the number of statics involved) - so what looks like useful documentation is actually misleading.
Aside from that you can then run the tests by implementing EventListener. I was interested in getting a one to one mapping between our tests and NUnit tests so each test is run on it's own. To achieve this you just need to implement TestStarted and TestFinished to do logging:
public void TestStarted(TestName testName)
{
}
public void TestFinished(TestResult result)
{
string text;
if (result.IsFailure)
text = "Failure";
else if (result.IsError)
text = "Error";
else
return;
using (var block = CreateLogBlock(text))
{
LogFailureTo(block);
block.LogString(result.Message);
}
}
There are a couple of problems with this approach: Inherited Test base classes from other assemblies with SetUp methods that delegate to ones in the current assembly dont get called. It also has problems with TestFixtureSetup methods which are only called in NUnit when TestSuites are Run (as opposed to running test methods on their own).
These both seem to be problems with NUnit although if you dont want to construct wrapped tests individually I think you could just put in a call to suite.Run with the appropriate parameters and this will fix the latter problem