I'm trying to run an action via CLI. The action is UsersController::test()
So, I run this:
php libraries/lithium/console/lithium.php \\app\\controllers\\UsersController test
But I keep running into this error:
PHP Fatal error: Call to undefined method lithium\console\Request::get() in /var/www/example.com/libraries/lithium/action/Controller.php on line 154
What am I doing wrong?
See http://li3.me/docs/lithium/console for reference.
As far as I know, it's not possible to call controllers directly from the command line. Although from your error, it seems it's trying to do something.
Instead, create a class that extends from \lithium\console\Command and place that in namespace app\extensions\command. For example, name that class Users. Inside that class, create a method called test() that will be run when you invoke your command via cli.
Now when you run li3 (or lithium.php), it should print all of the available commands and you should see yours in the list. You would call li3 users test and that should run it if you've added lithium/console/li3 to your bin path. Or you could call php -f path/to/lithium.php -- users test which should do the same thing. If you left out test, it will look for a method called run() in your app\extensions\console\Users class and call that.
You could potentially create an instance of your controller and call the test() method, but as you saw, the Request class that is available when running from a web browser is not the same Request class when running from the command-line. It would probably be better to take the business logic in your controller method and move it to another class and then pass in the request parameters from your controller to that method. Then from the console command class, you would similarly call the same centralized method.
Related
Thank you all so much! I just started in Kotlin which probably should be called the K language (like C and F), and have found so many solutions here on this site...it's awesome!
I have an independent class file called AppTime.kt and it's declared in the AndroidManifest.xml file:
<application
android:name=".AppTime"
class AppTime : Application() {
fun burntToast(sMsg: String) {
Toast.makeText(this.applicationContext, "!", Toast.LENGTH_LONG).show()
}
}
It doesn't run when called anywhere from a Fragment class:
class FirstFragment : Fragment() {...
AppTime().burntToast()
I've tried every approach using parameters for the Toast following makeText(...
and then to call it from a Fragment with or without context or string parameters.
Is it the type of class I have?
Functions defined inside a class can only be called on an instance of that class, as you already found.
But you cannot simply instantiate an arbitrary Application and expect it to work. Android does a lot of behind-the-scenes setup of framework classes before they are usable. Any Application or Activity that you instantiate yourself is useless. You have to use the instances that are provided to you through the lifecycle of the Activities that get launched in your application.
If you want to call this function from your Fragment, you will have to get an instance of your application, which you can get from its associated Activity. Since the Activity class doesn't know about your specific subclass of Application, you must also cast the application to your specific subclass to be able to call its unique functions. You can get the Activity by using requireActivity().
(requireActivity().application as AppTime).burntToast()
In Eclipse CDT at DefaultBinaryFileEditor class, in the method getStorage there is a comment that tells the line objdump.getOutput(limitBytes) is a UI blocking call...
How can I make it run in background without UI Blocking to process longer files than it is stated with parameter int limitBytes = 6*1024*1024;
I can access org.eclipse.cdt.utils.Objdump class' getOutput method via plugin.xml extension point "org.eclipse.cdt.core.BinaryParser"...
I tried to replace the class that is used in extension point "org.eclipse.ui.editors" in editor tag with id "org.eclipse.cdt.ui.binaryEditor" via my plugin.xml, but this did not worked.
I put a boolean flag to outer class and in inner class BinaryFileEditorInput in method getStorage I put a Job and before this job works I created an empty fStorage = new FileStorage. I return this empty fstorage. So first the editor gets blank. Then when the objdump.getOutput(limitBytes) method returns in job, I set the fStorage to the returned output. I simply call the outer class'es refresh method. I put a reference of created outer class to inner static class in outerclasses constructor. This way I can access the refresh method. Also I moved fStorage varible to outerclass because refresh method triggers creating a new inner class so it overrides the valuable fStorage variable.
Finally If you want to update the opened elf file editor when you build the project again, assign the boolean variable and fStorage to first values in method resourceChanged before calling refresh method.
I need to do the following in MEF:
Whenever I resolve a certain interface I need a piece of code to run which gives the implementation.
It must never be a singleton, so MEF must always run that particular piece of code.
private IContract MethodToExecute()
var resolved = container.GetExport(); --> must run the MethodToExecute
"core" refers to the initial piece of the application that is loaded.
In order to bind url to places, GWT uses PlaceTokenizer<P extends Place>. When loading the application from the url, it calls the method P getPlace(String token) to retrieve a new instance of the place to call.
due to the asynchronous nature of code splitting, I can't create the place inside a runAsync in this method. So I have to put all the places of my app in the core.
To link places to activity, GWT callsActivity getActivity(Place place) (from com.google.gwt.activity.shared.ActivityMapper) to retrieve a new instance of the activity.
Once again, i have to put all my activities in the core.
Here's what I want to try: Write a custom com.google.gwt.place.shared.Delegate that
bind itself on PlaceChangeRequestEvent. If the AppPiece corresponding to the requestedPlace isn't loaded, it calls event.setWarning(NEED_TO_LOAD_MODULE)
in the confirm(String message) method, always return false when the message equals NEED_TO_LOAD_MODULE (so it doesn't bother the user), and load the module via RunAsync.
Once the module is loaded, call goTo(requestedPlace)
Each AppPiece of my application contains a bunch of activies and the corresponding views. Since the mappers are only called when PlaceChangeEventis fired, i could generate a new instance of my activity via AppPiece.getSomeActivityInstance().
I'm pretty sure this will work, but what bother me is that
Finding wich AppPiece to load depending on the requestedPlace will force me to write code that will be very similar to my mappers
I would like to have my places inside the corresponding AppPiece
Overriding Delegate for this purpose is tricky, and I'm looking for a better solution
You don't have to put all your activities in the core (as you call it): while an Activity instance is retrieved synchronously, it's allowed to start asynchronously. This is where you'd put your GWT.runAsync call.
See http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=5129 and https://groups.google.com/d/topic/google-web-toolkit/8_P_d4aT-0E/discussion
I've been going through the documentation for creating Prism applications and setting up the Shell seems to be split into 2 methods, CreateShell() and InitializeShell()
For CreateShell I simply have:
protected override DependencyObject CreateShell()
{
return ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<Shell>();
}
The documentation says that code is needed in the IntializeShell() method to ensure it is ready to be displayed. The following is given as an example:
protected override void InitializeShell()
{
Application.Current.MainWindow = (Window)this.Shell;
Application.Current.MainWindow.Show();
}
I have noticed however that if I omit the first line and just call the Show() method it seems to work (MainWindow already appears to have Shell assigned to it). Can you tell me why this is the case, and why we still need to explicity set the MainWindow property here?
Also as I did not specifically register Shell to an interface within the container, how is it able to resolve Shell in CreateShell()?
Question 1: Why does just calling Show() seem to work and why is Application.Current.MainWindow seem to be populated?
There are a few things you should check here. In a typical WPF application, the type for the main window can be specified in the App.xaml. If it is specified, WPF will instantiate one of those for you. This is not desirable because WPF won't use your container to instantiate your shell and any dependencies won't be resolved.
When you run that first line of code in InitializeShell, you'd be replacing the WPF-instantiated Shell object with the one you manually instantiated.
I looked at the code for the MEF and Unity bootstrappers and I don't see anywhere that MainWindow is being set, but I don't know if you might have customized the base bootstrappers, so that's something else to look for.
Show() works because you are simply showing the window you instantiated and the WPF-instantiated one isn't shown. This is my theory, but without seeing your code, it'd be tough to say for sure.
Question 2: How can Unity resolve something that hasn't been registered?
Unity can always resolve a concrete type, regardless of registration. It cannot resolve non-concrete classes that haven't been mapped to a concrete type. This is why Resolve<Shell> works, but Resolve<IMyInterface> doesn't unless you register a type.