I have the following setup on my site:
You enter credentials on a login page and that takes you to a second page (which normally produces no screen output) which validates the user and redirects them to the appropriate homepage.
My step definitions consist of three steps:
Load up initial login page.
Enter credentials and submit.
Verify (by checking page title) that I made it in the homepage.
My first step passes with flying colors.
My second step claims to pass.
My third step fails.
Upon review, I found that it's because the second step, while officially it didn't fail, didn't do what it was supposed to do. Zombie got stuck on the validation page. At first I thought it was just missing the redirect, but it seems that it doesn't execute ANYTHING on the validation page. I even commented out the entire page and simply put an output of "Hello" at the top of the page. If my browser.html(); can be believed, it doesn't even see that. I know I make it to the second page because I have
console.log("\n" + browser.location.href);
which shows me the URL of the second page.
I then have
console.log(browser.html());
which is empty.
I even have a:
browser.wait(10000,callback);
beforehand to give it some processing time but to no avail.
Some information that might be relevant:
This is a ColdFusion site. I know zombie's handling the concept of CF since it's loading the login page initially, although there's not much actual CF processing going on there.
There's DB access happening. If zombie is accessing like a regular browser, it shouldn't make a difference, but it's there. Although even when I comment everything out, it still doesn't work, so I doubt that's actually relevant.
This is my script portion for the login step. Please advise if I'm approaching this the wrong way.
this.When(/^I input my credentials$/, function(callback) {
browser.fill("login", "myusername").fill("password", "mypassword");
browser.document.forms[0].submit();
// Put in here to account for redirect time it will take to get past validation page to actual home page
browser.wait(10000,callback);
callback();
});
If you need any other information, please let me know. I would appreciate any help whatsoever in being able to make this work!
I am not sure I fully understand your problem, but it looks like this may be an issue with the way you are handling asynchronous calls. At any rate, you should not need to browser.wait for something like this at all. Try something like the following:
this.When(/^I input my credentials$/, function(callback) {
browser
.fill("login", "myusername")
.fill("password", "mypassword")
.pressButton("#selectorForYourButton", function (err) {
// Check for errors or any other behaviour this test is actually about
callback();
});
});
First, the pressButton method is preferable because it gets closer to testing actual browser interaction. But more importantly, callback() is only executed after all the events fired off by pressing the button have been resolved.
Related
I have a situation in which I need to reuse an action that has its functionality wrapped in a withForm closure.
Everything works well when submitting the form but when I try to reuse that action in another way I get redirect errors from my browser. Specifically, I need to redirect another action to it, possibly call it with chain, and I also want to call it from a hyperlink.
I'd really like to avoid creating a redundant action or having the invalidToken closure execute the same code. I've tried to find some more details about how withForm works and find out what happens if no token is passed to the closure but the Googles have let me down.
Is this possible? Am I trying to make it do something it can't?
More info:
I have a user edit controller action. It is wrapped with the withForm closure. There are three different cases in which I need to call this controller to render the user edit page:
An admin enters the user's id into an input and clicks the form
submit button (this form uses useToken). This needs to be secured
and protected from duplicate form submission.
An admin selects a user to edit from a list of employees by clicking
on the user's name (a hyperlink). Its possible I could turn this into a form submission with useToken and do some CSS styling to make it look like a link.
An admin creates a new user. When the user is successfully created
the create controller redirects (or uses chain) to the edit
controller. I can't find a work around for this, except to create a redundant controller.
If your code is used in more than one place a controller action isn't the best place to put it. I suggest you to move that piece of code to a service and call it from both actions.
Here is my solution. If anyone has some insight into other methods of solving this please contribute. I'm sure I'm not the only one that has had this problem.
The answer is due, in large part to #Sergio's response. It was far more simple than what I was thinking it would be. I created my edit action without withFormthen call it from another action that wraps the edit action in the withForm.
def editWT(Long uid, Long pid){
withForm{
edit(uid, pid)
}
}
def edit(Long uid, Long pid){
// Do lots of stuff to prep the data for rendering the view
}
This answer isn't innovative or ground-breaking but it works. I hope this helps someone else.
I've been playing around with building some realtime functionality using Sails.js version 0.10-rc5 (currently the #beta release).
To accomplish anything, i've been following the sweet SailsCast tutorial on this subject (sailsCast link)
It talks about subscribing to a model via a 'subscribe' action within the model's controller. Then listening to it at the client side, waiting for the server to emit messages. Quite straightforward, although I do not seem to receive any messages.
I'm trying to do this to get real-time updates on anything that changes in my User models, or if new ones get created.. So I can display login status etc. in real time. Pretty much exactly the stuff that's explained in the sailsCast.
In my terminal i'll get two things worth noticing, of which the first is the following:
debug: Deprecated: `Model.subscribe(socket, null, ...)`
debug: See http://links.sailsjs.org/docs/config/pubsub
debug: (⌘ + double-click to open link from terminal)
debug: Please use instance rooms instead (or raw sails.sockets.*() methods.)
It seems like the 'subscribe' method has been deprecated. Could anybody tell me if that's correct, and tell me how to fix this? I've been checking out the reference to the documentation in the debug message, although it just points me to the global documentation page. I've been searching for an answer elsewhere, but haven't found anything useful.
The second message I'm getting is:
warn: You are trying to render a view (_session/new), but Sails doesn't support rendering views over Socket.io... yet!
You might consider serving your HTML view normally, then fetching data with sockets in your client-side JavaScript.
If you didn't intend to serve a view here, you might look into content-negotiation
to handle AJAX/socket requests explictly, instead of `res.redirect()`/`res.view()`.
Now, i'm quite sure this is because I have an 'isAuthenticated' policy added to all of my controllers and actions. When a user is not authenticated, it'll redirect to a session/new page. Somebody must log in to be able to use the application. When I remove the 'isAuthenticated' policy from the 'subscribed' action, the warnings disappear. Although that means anyone will get updates via sockets (when I get it to work), even when they're logged out. - I don't really feel like people just sitting at the login screen, fishing out the real time messages which are intended only for users who are logged in.
Can anyone help me getting the real time updates to work? I'd really appreciate!
As far as the socket messages not being received, the issue is that you're following a tutorial for v0.9.x, but you're using a beta version of Sails in which PubSub has gone through some changes. That's covered in this answer about the "create" events not being received.
Your second issue isn't about sockets at all; you'll just need to reconsider your architecture a bit. If you want to to use socket requests to sign users in, then you'll have to be more careful about redirecting them because, as the message states, you can't render a view over a socket. Technically you could send a bunch of HTML back to the client over a socket, and replace your current page with it, but that's not very good practice. What you can do instead is, in your isAuthenticated policy, check whether the request is happening via sockets (using req.isSocket) and if so, send back a message that the front end can interpret to mean, "you should redirect to the login page now". Something like:
module.exports = function (req, res, next) {
if ([your auth logic here]) {
return next();
}
else {
if (req.isSocket) {
return res.json({status: 403, redirectTo: "/session/new"});
} else {
return res.redirect("/session/new");
}
}
}
I am adding Facebook login to my existing asp.net application. I have added a Facebook login button to my login screen. Now, I click Facebook's login button and in IE 9 it throws client-side exception in all.js on Line 22: if(a.params)b.fbCallID=a.id;
Even after that exception I see the Facebook login screen and can log in, and in the main browser window I get the auth.login event, so I can live with that.
But, if I am already logged in to Facebook, I come to the page and click Facebook login button, I briefly see the empty popup window, then I get teh same client-side exception, and then I get no event in the main browser window, so I don't know if the user logged in so I can't redirect them to another page.
I tried the channelUrl trick but it didn't help.
Any suggestions what's going on?
I found this hack that fixed the issue for me; add this line right after you call FB.init():
// Hack to fix http://bugs.developers.facebook.net/show_bug.cgi?id=20168 for IE7/8/9
FB.UIServer.setLoadedNode = function (a, b) {
FB.UIServer._loadedNodes[a.id] = b;
};
The reason it is happening (from the websites and documents I have read, and believe me, I've read a LOT) is that IE refuses cross-site javascript, and it sees the all.js as crossing the sandbox border. A good discussion can be found here.
Some people say that adding the channel.html file works, but we have tried all flavors of that, and have not had any success. (Remember that the http or https must match the page sending the request.)
Microsoft makes reference to this same issue and their advice is to add the site to trusted sites (that doesn't help). Old advice (from last year) is to add CP="HONK" as your compact privacy policy, but I think that bug was fixed, and it was cookie-related.
What seems to be happening to us is that the login actually continues, and the callback gets called properly, but the main thread that should complete outside of the login call stops executing (because of the error). So, any functions outside the login fail to execute after the login call.
If anyone has a way to get IE to not throw the exception or to create a workaround for this issue, I am desperate to have it. Any info needed I will be happy to provide, but a sample is here:
enter code here
code before login here...
FB.login(function(response){
callback stuff here... This part fires.
});
main thread stuff here... This fails because of permission denied error.
I'm trying to write a Greasemonkey script for Facebook and having some trouble with the funky page/content loading that they do (I don't quite understand this - a lot of the links are actually just changing the GET, but I think they do some kind of server redirect to make the URL look the same to the browser too?). Essentially the only test required is putting a GM_log() on its own in the script. If you click around Facebook, even with facebook.com/* as the pattern, it is often not executed. Is there anything I can do, or is the idea of a "page load" fixed in Greasemonkey, and FB is "tricking" it into not running by using a single URL?
If I try to do some basic content manipulation like this:
GM.log("starting");
var GM_FB=new Object;
GM_FB.birthdays = document.evaluate("//div[#class='UIUpcoming_Item']", document, null, XPathResult.UNORDERED_NODE_SNAPSHOT_TYPE, null);
for (i = GM_FB.birthdays.snapshotLength - 1; i >= 0; i--) {
if (GM_FB.birthdayRegex.test(GM_FB.birthdays.snapshotItem(i).innerHTML)) {
GM_FB.birthdays.snapshotItem(i).setAttribute('style','font-weight: bold; background: #fffe88');
}
}
The result is that sometimes only a manual page refresh will make it work. Pulling up the Firebug console and forcing the code to run works fine. Note that this isn't due to late loading of certain parts of the DOM: I have adding some code later to wait for the relevant elements and, crucially, the message never gets logged for certain transitions. For example, when I switch from Messages to News Feed and back.
Aren't they using ajax to load content in a div? You can find the element which is being updated by using Firebug for example.
When you click something and the URL changes, but with a # on the URL and after this some text, it means the text is not a path, it's a parameter, the browser won't change the page you are, so since GreaseMonkey inject the script on the page loads it won't inject again, because the page is not reloading.
As in your example the URL facebook.com/#!/sk=messages is not navigating away from facebook.com/ it will not fire window.load event.
So you need to find which element is being changed and add an event listener to that element, you can do is using Firebug as I mentioned before.
After you find out what element is getting the content, you have to add an event listener to that element and not the page (GreaseMonkey adds only on the window load event).
So in you GM script you would have ("air code")
document.getElement('dynamic_div').addEvent('load', /*your script*/);
I have an issue with a task management application where occasionally users close their browsers/tabs and the information which they type goes away because they accidentally close a browser/tab, resulting in the loss of the text which they've entered ( and some can spend half an hour entering in text ).
So I have to provide a solution, I have a couple ideas but wanted input on the best to go with, or if you have a better solution let me hear ya.
Option 1:
On the window.onunload or possibly window.onbeforeunload event invoke a confirm() dialog and first test whether the task logging area has any text in it and is not blank. If it's not blank, invoke window.confirm() and ask whether the user wants to close the tab/window without saving a log.
My concern with option #1 is that it may be user intrusive.
Option 2:
On the same event, don't invoke any confirm() but instead forcefully save the text in the task logging area in a cookie. Then possibly offer a button that tries to restore any saved task information from the cookie on the same page, so hitting that button would make it parse the cookies and retrieve the information.
The window.onbeforeunload event works a little strangely. If you define a handler for it, the browser will display a generic message about losing data by navigating away from the page, with the string you return from the handler function inserted into the middle of the message. See here:
alt text http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/8724/windowonbeforeunload.png
So what we do: when we know something on the page is unsaved, we set:
window.onbeforeunload = function(){
return "[SOME CUSTOM MESSAGE FROM THE APP]";
}
and once the user saves, and we know we don't need to show them the message, we set:
window.onbeforeunload = null;
It is a little intrusive, but it's better than your users losing data accidentally.
If the user is daft enough to navigate away before submitting what they have been doing, then they shouldn't mind an intrusion to ask if they mean to do something that is apparently stupid.
Also, SO uses a confirmation dialog on navigating away, and most (some) users here are pretty smart.
This is the easiest to use, and will probably help the users more.
If someone writes a long piece of text, then closes the browser without submitting it, they might be more pleased to sort the problem there and then rather than finding out the next morning they didn't do it...
I would research AJAX frameworks for the particular web server/languages you are using. AJAX would allow you to save form data as it is typed (for example, this is how Google Docs works).