Is it possible to output/log text at the very end the workspace generator output?
I would like to notify the user of the next steps he/she should do, but my logs are kind of hidden above all the output generated by the tree updates.
export default async function (tree: Tree, schema: GeneratorOptions) {
await applicationGenerator(tree, {
// options go here
});
//format all the new files
await formatFiles(tree);
// log out next steps
logger.info('next steps');
logger.info('* Complete information in /src/environment files');
logger.info('* Adjust example routes in /src/app/app.tsx');
}
The code above results in the following output, as you can see my logs are completely at the top (and nobody would ever see them)
I was having the same problem and judging from this open issue it does not seem to be a way to do it.
What I ended up doing was wrapping the command to run the generator in a node script and then run that script instead:
import {execSync} from "child_process";
execSync('nx workspace-generator your-generator', {stdio: 'inherit'})
console.log('after')
I am using the following code, in an attempt to batch upload the changes made on a table:
onConfirmActionPressed: function() {
var oModel = this.getModel();
oModel.setUseBatch(true);
oModel.submitChanges();
}
I am using setProperty() to set the new values, like this:
onSingleSwitchChange: function(oControlEvent) {
var oModel = this.getView().getModel();
var rowBindingContext = oControlEvent.getSource().getBindingContext();
oModel.setProperty(rowBindingContext.sPath + "/Zlspr", "A");
}
When onConfirmActionPressed is executed, I get a server error, saying that "Commit work during changeset processing not allowed" on SAP R3.
When I upload the lines of the table one-by-one, it works fine. However, uploading this way is very slow, and in some cases it takes more than 10 minutes for the process to complete.
Am I doing something wrong while batch submitting? Is there a chance the issue is due to server (R3) misconfiguration?
You need to override methods:
/IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_BEGIN
/IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_END
Keep track of the errors across all calls to update methods and if everything went OK then in changeset_end perform commit on the database
edit:
To clarify:
In your Data Provider Class Extension in SAP Gateway you need to find your YOURENTITY_UPDATE_ENTITY method and get rid off any COMMIT WORK statements.
Then you need to redefine /IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_BEGIN method and, which is a method which is fired before any batch operation. You could define a class attribute such as table mt_batch_errors which would be emptied in this method.
When you post batch changes from UI5 using oModel.submitChanges() all single changes to Entities are directed to appropriate ..._UPDATE_ENTITY methods. You need to keep track of any possible errors and if any occurs then fill your mt_batch_errors table.
After all entities have been updated /IWBEP/IF_MGW_APPL_SRV_RUNTIME~CHANGESET_END method is fired in which you are able to check mt_batch_errors table if any errors occurred during the batch process. If there were errors then you should probably ROLLBACK WORK, and if not then you are free to COMMIT WORK.
That is just an example of how it could be done, I'm curious of other suggestions.
Good luck!
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'm using a GivenStories for executing Login scenario which is located in different story.
I was wondering if there is a way to use something similar in order to execute a logout story which is also located in different story than one I actually executing.
I know that I can do some tricks with #before/after annotations , but the question is if I can execute a "post" story
Thanks
Based on the jBehave annotation documentation a post story step can be implemented by annotating a step class method with #AfterStory (or #AfterStories if you want to execute only after all stories complete). The #AfterStory method will execute regardless of whether your executing story contains a step from the related step class (i.e. is guaranteed to execute after every story - see below for restricting to given stories).
The #BeforeStory and #AfterStory annotations allow the corresponding
methods to be executed before and after each story, either a
GivenStory or not:
#AfterStory // equivalent to #AfterStory(uponGivenStory=false)
public void afterStory() {
// ...
}
#AfterStory(uponGivenStory=true)
public void afterGivenStory() {
// ...
}
This is the answer I got from the jbehave dev channel.
Hi,
there is no such mechanism, but you could:
use the Lifecycle to execute steps (not stories) after the execution
of a scenario (executed after each scenario) have a final scenario
which invokes the given stories
How do I "tell" EF to log queries globally? I was reading this blog post: EF logging which tells in general how to log sql queries. But I still have a few questions regarding this logger.
Where would I need to place this line context.Database.Log = s =>
logger.Log("EFApp", s);?
Can it be globally set? Or do I have to place it everywhere I do DB
operations?
In the "Failed execution" section, the blogger wrote that, and I
quote:
For commands that fail by throwing an exception, the output contains the message from the exception.
Will this be logged too if I don't use the context.Database.Log?
Whenever you want the context to start logging.
It appears to be done on the context object so it should be done every time you create a new context. You could add this line of code in your constructor though to ensure that it is always enabled.
It will not log if you do not enable the logging.
I don't recommend to use that's functionality, because, it hasn't reason to exists in the real case.
Thats it use a lot of to debug code only. But, wether you wanna know more than details ... access link... https://cmatskas.com/logging-and-tracing-with-entity-framework-6/
In this case you can put code like this
public void Mylog()
{
//Thats a delegate where you can set this property to log using
//delegate type Action, see the code below
context.Database.Log = k=>Console.Write("Any query SQL")
//Or
context.Database.Log = k=>Test("Any query SQL")
}
public void Test(string x){
Console.Write(x)
}
I hope thats useufull