This is the first time I've used flash builder (I usually just use flash itself for all my AS stuff). I've got a bunch of non static classes and one of them has an issue passing a parameter from a constructor to a private var.
private function init():void
{
var keys:Primes = new Primes();
var keyArray:Array = [["kdc",keys.getRandomPrime()],["client",keys.getRandomPrime()],["server",keys.getRandomPrime()]];
trace(keyArray);
kdc = new KeyDistCentre(keyArray);
client = new Client(keyArray[1][1]);
server = new Server(keyArray[2][1]);
}
It's the kdc = new line which is causing an issue, when I pass keyArray into it it has a problem assigning the value to the private var in the class.
package
{
public class KeyDistCentre extends Client
{
private var keyList:Array = new Array();
public function KeyDistCentre(keys:Array)
{
super(keys[0][1]);
keyList = keys; **ERROR**
}
public function generateTicket():Ticket
{
return null;
}
}
}
The weird thing is even when I comment out all the problematic lines, the exact same error with line reference occurs...
Related
I'm running an app calling a web reference and assigning different values to its properties.
As I'm debugging the app, I see the object has all the properties needed but when I run the following logic:
private string ClassToXML(Object classObject)
{
var myString = new System.IO.StringWriter();
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(classObject.GetType());
serializer.Serialize(myString, classObject);
return myString.ToString();
}
MyString returns an XML string containing all the properties that are not System.Nullable.
I run a console test app where I created the same Web references used in the original code.
This is a snippet:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
MerchantWSBO merchantWSBO = new MerchantWSBO();
MerchantWSVO merchantWSVO = new MerchantWSVO();
merchantWSVO.discoverRetained = true;
merchantWSBO.overview = merchantWSVO;
string xmlToSend = ClassToXML(merchantWSBO);
}
private static string ClassToXML(Object classObject)
{
var myString = new System.IO.StringWriter();
var serializer = new XmlSerializer(classObject.GetType());
serializer.Serialize(myString, classObject);
return myString.ToString();
}
}
And the above logic builds an XML String and that string has all the properties I need.
I don't see anything wrong, but the same properties are not being displayed in the XML String in my original app.
I'm not sure what's wrong with that.
I have an Autofac container that uses "AnyConcreteTypeNotAlreadyRegisteredSource" to allow resolution of any concrete type without explicit need to register it. If I register a singleton instance of a concrete type using the RegisterInstance method, there are no issues with the resolution. However, if I create a child lifetime scope and do the same concrete type singleton instance registration, the child lifetime scope is not able to resolve the type anymore. It throws the following exception:
Autofac.Core.Activators.Reflection.NoConstructorsFoundException: 'No accessible constructors were found for the type 'AutofacTests.IssueTests+Manager'.'
Why is it even trying to instantiate the object when I have a singleton instance of that type registered already? It seems like this problem only comes when I try to resolve a concrete type instead of an interface.
Here is the test code that demonstrates the problem (The test method name and comments show what works and what does not):
using Autofac;
using Autofac.Features.ResolveAnything;
namespace AutofacTests
{
[TestClass]
public class IssueTests
{
private interface IPerson
{
}
private class Employee : IPerson
{
public Employee()
{
}
}
private class Manager : Employee
{
internal Manager(IPerson worker)
{
string s = "";
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void Resolution_ThatWorks()
{
ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder();
var mgr = new Manager(null);
builder.RegisterInstance<IPerson>(mgr);
builder.RegisterInstance<Manager>(mgr);
using (var container = builder.Build())
{
var person = container.Resolve<Manager>();
Assert.IsNotNull(person, "Employee could not be resolved!");
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void ResolutionWithAnyTypeSource_ThatWorks()
{
ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder();
// NOTE: This source registration does not impact the concrete type resolution when no child lifetime scope is involved.
builder.RegisterSource(new AnyConcreteTypeNotAlreadyRegisteredSource());
var mgr = new Manager(null);
builder.RegisterInstance<IPerson>(mgr);
builder.RegisterInstance<Manager>(mgr);
using (var container = builder.Build())
{
var person = container.Resolve<Manager>();
Assert.IsNotNull(person, "Employee could not be resolved!");
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void NestedResolution_ThatWorks()
{
ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder();
using (var container = builder.Build())
{
void RegisterNestedServices(ContainerBuilder builder)
{
var mgr = new Manager(null);
builder.RegisterInstance<IPerson>(mgr);
builder.RegisterInstance<Manager>(mgr);
}
using (var childContainer = container.BeginLifetimeScope(RegisterNestedServices))
{
var person = childContainer.Resolve<Manager>();
Assert.IsNotNull(person, "Employee could not be resolved!");
}
}
}
[TestMethod]
public void NestedResolutionWithAnyTypeSource_ThatFails()
{
ContainerBuilder builder = new ContainerBuilder();
// NOTE: This source registration causes the resolution of a concrete type to fail in a child lifetime scope.
builder.RegisterSource(new AnyConcreteTypeNotAlreadyRegisteredSource());
using (var container = builder.Build())
{
void RegisterNestedServices(ContainerBuilder builder)
{
var mgr = new Manager(null);
builder.RegisterInstance<IPerson>(mgr);
builder.RegisterInstance<Manager>(mgr);
}
using (var childContainer = container.BeginLifetimeScope(RegisterNestedServices))
{
// Works
var person = childContainer.Resolve<IPerson>();
Assert.IsNotNull(person, "Person could not be resolved!");
// *** Fails ***
var emp = childContainer.Resolve<Manager>();
Assert.IsNotNull(emp, "Employee could not be resolved!");
}
}
}
}
}
Anyone has any idea what am I doing wrong or how to make this work in the child lifetime scopes?
Thanks.
It appears you're hitting this known issue where AnyConcreteTypeNotAlreadyRegisteredSource (ACTNARS) doesn't properly look at new registrations in child scopes.
At the time of this writing there is not a fix for it, but we'd love a PR to get it fixed. It's been open for a while now.
Whenever I try to access a variable within a class method, Flash gives the error message: Access of undefined variable
This is true for variables vertices, i, deltap, etc. below. All of these should be defined for the whole class, as far as I can see. What am I missing?
package
{
import flash.display.Shape;
import flash.display.Graphics;
import fl.motion.Color;
public dynamic class Quadrilateral extends Shape {
public var vertices:Array = new Array();
public var endvertices:Array;
public var angle:Number;
public var mycolor:Color;
private var steps:Number;
private var deltap:Array = new Array(4);
private var i:Number;
public function Quadrilateral(vertexlist, fillcolor, stepcount=100) {
vertices = vertexlist;
mycolor = fillcolor;
steps = stepcount;
drawme()
}
public static function setfinal(vertexlist) {
endvertices = vertexlist;
for (i=0;i<4;i++) {
deltap[i] = (endvertices[i] - vertices[i])/100;
}
}
}
You are missing that the method is static, which means that you cannot access non static members from inside it.
That method should not be static.
I've got errors
Assets/TextPierwszy.js(22,28): BCE0019: 'id' is not a member of 'Object'.
Assets/TextPierwszy.js(24,38): BCE0019: 'id' is not a member of 'Object'.
when trying to compile that script in UnityScript.
#pragma strict
private var pole : UI.Text;
public var Started = false;
public var Ludnosc = new Array();
public class Human {
public var id : byte;
public var gender : byte; // 0=k 1=m
public var age : byte;
public var pregnant : byte;
function Breed(partner) {
// Tu będzie logika rozmnażania
}
public var parents : int[]; //Najpierw podajemy ID matki, potem ID ojca.
}
function Test1() {
if(!Started) {
Started = true;
Ludnosc.push(new Human());
Ludnosc[0].id = 1; //Line number 22
Debug.Log(Ludnosc.length);
Debug.Log(Ludnosc[0].id); //Line number 24
}
}
How can I tell compiler to track Ludnosc[0] as instance of Human instead of tracking it at plain Object?
Or is there problem in other place? Also tried
public var Ludnosc : Human = new Array();
but this don't work too. :(
This is because when you initialize Ludnosc using:
public var Ludnosc = new Array();
you're creating an array of Object elements. As a result, when you try to access Ludnosc[0].id, Ludnosc[0] is treated an an Object and hence does not have id available to it.
To address this, either initialize Ludnosc as a built-in array like so:
public var Ludnosc : Human[];
Ludnosc = new Human[1]; // When you're initializing it
Ludnosc[0] = new Human(); // When you're populating it
Or, if you really want to use a JavaScript array, you can cast the Object to a Human when you access the value in Test1(), modify the typecasted version, then place it back into the array (haven't tested this code):
function Test1() {
if(!Started) {
Started = true;
Ludnosc.push(new Human());
var tempHuman = Ludnosc[0] as Human;
tempHuman.id = 1;
Ludnosc[0] = tempHuman; // Overwriting with the updated Human
Debug.Log(Ludnosc.length);
Debug.Log(tempHuman.id);
}
}
Hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions.
I am currently examining Moles from the outside while I wait for my VS 2010 license, and I wonder whether Moles allows me to:
provide the ability to assígn multiple mole delegates for a method being moled, perhaps at a test fixture setup level?
switch in runtime in my test case, which of my mole delegates must be invoked for the upcoming call(s) to the moled method being isolated?
Any hints?
Best Answer:
It is much easier and makes far more sense to include gating logic in the detour method, than using two stubs for the same method! For example, MyMethod reads data from three different files on disk, each requiring different mock data to be returned. We may detour System.IO.File.OpenRead and gate the return value by analyzing the input parameters of OpenRead:
TEST METHOD:
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
public void Test()
{
System.IO.Moles.MFile.OpenReadString = filePath => {
var mockStream = new System.IO.FileStream();
byte[] buffer;
switch (filePath)
{
case #"C:\DataFile.dat":
mockStream.Write(buffer, 0, 0); // Populate stream
break;
case #"C:\TextFile.txt":
mockStream.Write(buffer, 0, 0); // Populate stream
break;
case #"C:\LogFile.log":
mockStream.Write(buffer, 0, 0); // Populate stream
break;
}
return mockStream;
};
var target = new MyClass();
target.MyMethod();
}
TARGET TYPE:
using System.IO;
public class MyClass
{
public void MyMethod()
{
var fileAData = File.OpenRead(#"C:\DataFile.dat");
var fileBData = File.OpenRead(#"C:\TextFile.txt");
var fileCData = File.OpenRead(#"C:\LogFile.log");
}
}
Direct Answer to Your Questions:
Yes to #1: instantiate one type for each detour, and then use each for the desired behavior. And, yes to #2: act upon one instance of the mole type or the other. This requires addition of method input parameters or class constructor injection.
For example, MyMethod reads three data files from disk, and you need to pass back three different data mocks. MyMethod requires three parameters, an overtly intrusive solution. (Note input parameters are FileInfo type; because, System.IO>File is static and can not be instantiated: For example:
TEST METHOD:
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
public void Test()
{
var fileInfoMoleA = new System.IO.Moles.MFileInfo();
fileInfoMoleA.OpenRead = () => { return new FileStream(); };
var fileInfoMoleB = new System.IO.Moles.MFileInfo();
fileInfoMoleB.OpenRead = () => { return new FileStream(); };
var fileInfoMoleC = new System.IO.Moles.MFileInfo();
fileInfoMoleC.OpenRead = () => { return new FileStream(); };
var target = new MyClass();
target.MyMethod(fileInfoMoleA, fileInfoMoleB, fileInfoMoleC);
}
TARGET TYPE:
using System.IO;
public class MyClass
{
// Input parameters are FileInfo type; because, System.IO.File
// is a static class, and can not be instantiated.
public void MyMethod(FileInfo fileInfoA, FileInfo fileInfoB, FileInfo fileInfoC)
{
var fileAData = fileInfoA.OpenRead();
var fileBData = fileInfoB.OpenRead();
var fileCData = fileInfoC.OpenRead();
}
}
UPDATE:
In response to #Chai comment, it is possible to create common methods, within the test project, that may be referenced as the mole detour delegate. For example, you may wish to write a common method that may be referenced by any unit test, that sets up a variety of pre-configured scenarios. The following example displays how a parameterized method could be used. Get creative -- they're just method calls!
TARGET TYPES:
namespace PexMoleDemo
{
public class MyClass
{
private MyMath _math;
public MyClass()
{
_math = new MyMath() { left = 1m, right = 2m };
}
public decimal GetResults()
{
return _math.Divide();
}
}
public class MyOtherClass
{
private MyMath _math;
public MyOtherClass()
{
_math = new MyMath() { left = 100m, right = 200m };
}
public decimal Divide()
{
return _math.Divide();
}
}
public class MyMath
{
public decimal left { get; set; }
public decimal right { get; set; }
public decimal Divide()
{
return left / right;
}
}
}
TEST METHODS:
ArrangeScenarios() sets up mole detours, by switching on the enumeration parameter. This allows the same scenarios to be erected, in a DRY manner, throughout many tests.
using System;
using Microsoft.Moles.Framework;
using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting;
using PexMoleDemo;
[assembly: MoledAssembly("PexMoleDemo")]
namespace TestProject1
{
[TestClass()]
public class ProgramTest
{
public enum Scenarios
{
DivideByZero,
MultiplyInsteadOfDivide
}
private void ArrangeScenario(Scenarios scenario)
{
switch (scenario)
{
case Scenarios.DivideByZero:
PexMoleDemo.Moles.MMyMath.AllInstances.rightGet =
instance => { return 0m; };
break;
case Scenarios.MultiplyInsteadOfDivide:
PexMoleDemo.Moles.MMyMath.AllInstances.Divide =
instance => { return instance.left * instance.right; };
break;
default:
throw new NotImplementedException("Invalid scenario.");
}
}
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
[ExpectedException(typeof(DivideByZeroException))]
public void Test1()
{
ArrangeScenario(Scenarios.DivideByZero);
var target = new PexMoleDemo.MyClass();
var math = new PexMoleDemo.MyMath() { left = 1, right = 2 };
var left = math.left;
var right = math.right;
var actual = target.GetResults();
}
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
public void Test2()
{
ArrangeScenario(Scenarios.MultiplyInsteadOfDivide);
// Perform some sort of test that determines if code breaks
// when values are multiplied instead of divided.
}
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
[ExpectedException(typeof(DivideByZeroException))]
public void Test3()
{
ArrangeScenario(Scenarios.DivideByZero);
var target = new PexMoleDemo.MyOtherClass();
var math = new PexMoleDemo.MyMath() { left = 1, right = 2 };
var left = math.left;
var right = math.right;
var actual = target.Divide();
}
[TestMethod]
[HostType("Moles")]
public void Test4()
{
ArrangeScenario(Scenarios.MultiplyInsteadOfDivide);
// Perform some sort of test that determines if code breaks
// when values are multiplied instead of divided.
}
}
}