I have embedded OrientDB inside my Java application but have run in to some problems after this. Creating an Edge with null properties fails, but works after running
ALTER DATABASE SET standardElementConstraints = false
This is supposed to "change the setting to apply the Blueprints standard constraints against elements", but I can't find any documentation of what these standard constraints actually are.
What am I actually disabling by doing this?
You're only disabling Blueprints checks, like property with name 'id' and few other things, but don't worry, this doesn't break OrientDB in any way.
Related
With the release of the .TagWithCallSite() method in EF Core 6.0 I was wondering if there is a way to apply this globally on every query run via a DbContext in some way?
It would be much better to apply this across the whole project without having to put it on each query individually.
TagWithCallSite accepts parameters marked with CallerFilePathAttribute and CallerLineNumberAttribute which are filled in by compiler (or manually if needed) during build so it is impossible to set up globally.
No, you cant't do that.
When you explicitly define TagWithCallSite(), complier automatically fills default parameters filePath and lineNumber. It is not possible to define that for all queries because compiler do not store such information in Expression Tree.
I am using the PostSharp solution for INotifyPropertyChanged by decorating my business classes with the [NotifyPropertyChanged] attribute.
All works fine.
Now I wrote a custom aspect that handles property changes so that I get some custom flags set when some special properties change. This aspects is named [HandlePropertyChanged] and works when used alone.
Now I try to use both aspects in combination. As I read on the PostSharp page I can manually order them to ensure a fixed order by using
[NotifyPropertyChanged(AspectPriority = 0)]
[HandlePropertyChanged(AspectPriority = 1)]
In this case, I can build my solution, but because "NotifyPropertyChanged" runs before "HandlePropertyChanged", the changes on my properties are already done and the custom logic does not run correctly.
If I try this
[HandlePropertyChanged(AspectPriority = 0)]
[NotifyPropertyChanged(AspectPriority = 1)]
my build fails with the error at the bottm of the text (see below).
Best would be to simply do what NotifyPropertyChanged does in my custom aspect and forget about the PostSharp aspect
Is this possible?
0: Error C:\Source\WAVE\WAVE.Data.Contracts\Entities\Base\EntityBase.cs (17,16) PS0115: Conflicting aspects on "TopMotive.WAVE.Data.Contracts.Entities.Base.EntityBase`1": according to aspect dependencies, transformation "Instantiation of aspect PostSharp.Patterns.Model.NotifyPropertyChangedAttribute" should be located both before and after transformation "Instantiates binding collection for field "PostSharp.Patterns.Model.NotifyPropertyChangedAttribute/LocationBindings".".
This bug is fixed in PostSharp 5.0.52 and PostSharp 6.0.16 RC.
Try superior and free alternative: Stepen Cleary's Calculated Properties.
https://github.com/StephenCleary/CalculatedProperties/blob/master/README.md
I used both in production and found it to be far better than PostSharp's aspect.
Also from PostSharp docs:
"If a property getter calls a virtual method from its class or a delegate, or references a property of another object (without using canonical form this.field.Property), PostSharp will generate an error because it cannot resolve such a dependency at build time. The same limitations apply when your property getter contains complex data flows, such as loops, or calls to methods (except property getters) of other classes.
When this happens, you can either refactor your code so that it can be automatically analyzed by PostSharp, or you can take over the responsibility for analyzing the code"
None of those limitations apply to Calculated Properties. It can do loops, virtual methods, LINQ to objects, basically any runtime dependencies that you can imagine doesn't matter how indirect. Dependency graph rewires itself at runtime and just works without any ceremony. They are also fast.
just out of curiosity:
As you all might or might know, it is possible to set a custom BE logo with $GLOBALS['TBE_STYLES']['logo'] = '../fileadmin/mylogo.png'; in typo3conf/extTables.php.
This behavior is working since old v4.x times.
But I just read that extTables will be deprecated in v8.x.
I tried to find a simple solution to this (one that keeps that one-line simplicity and does NOT require me to create&install an extension!)
I moved this line to typo3conf/AdditionalConfiguration.php,
but it does not work from there.
Why?
What would be necessary to make this line work within typo3conf/AdditionalConfiguration.php ?
In TYPO3 8.x you'll be able to change a backend logo via EXT:backend, so you should stick to that approach. Read more in release notes.
UPDATE.
To answer your question, why TBE_STYLES defined in AdditionalConfiguration are ignored: take a look at unsetReservedGlobalVariables() method from \TYPO3\CMS\Core\Core\Bootstrap class. It is executed after all the configuration is initialized (Local and Additional are merged and populated) and explicitly calls unset($GLOBALS['TBE_STYLES']);.
I was just curious to know if it's by any means possible to add a sort functionality to the default find action of a model without overriding the same in the controller ?
We do have beforeCreate and afterCreate features in the models which is quite useful in many cases. Similarly beforeFetch or something like that, if exists can be really useful when we want some pre/post processing on the result set while doing a get request.
An example of this would be: localhost:1337/user?sort=id desc
Is it recommended that we place an Import on a property instead of a field? I tried it on a field and it is working but Resharper is telling me a warning that the field was never initialized.
ReSharper doesn't recognize that MEF will be setting the variable and since there is no guarntee that MEF will be setting the variable (example if it isn't put into a container for example), so it is reasonable for ReSharper to warn about this. You can either ignore it or simply initialize the field to null (or default(T)).
As for whether or not you should use a property or field I think using a field is fine (assuming it is not public). I generally reserve properties for things I want to expose publicly. One special case to consider here is that there are some issues having Imports on private members in low trust scenarios like SL or paritial trust because MEF uses reflection and you cannot use private reflection in some of those scenarios.