I have the following code in a GWT class:
private native JavaScriptObject getRequest() /*-{
var request = ...;
request.onOpen = function(response) {
this.#com.mdarveau.fnp.client.Client::onOpen(Lcom/mdarveau/fnp/client/Response;)(response);
};
return request;
}-*/;
void onOpen( Response response ) {
Window.alert( "Got response " + response );
}
However, when the function associated with request.onOpen is called, the "this variable" is not replaced with a reference to the compiled GWT class. Using chrome javascript console and debugger I see that it looks like a reference to the request object.
Any idea why? I also have jquery loaded, could there be a conflict?
Got it: you need to get a reference to this in the native code and then use it in the function block:
var theInstance = this;
and then
request.onOpen = function(response) {
theInstance.#com.mdarveau.fnp.client.Client::onOpen(Lcom/mdarveau/fnp/client/Response;)(response);
};
Related
I am trying call the encrypt function mentioned below:
var encryptor = require("./jsencrypt.js");
this.encrypt = function () {
var key="LxVtiqZV6g2D493gDBfG0BfV6sAhteG6hOCAu48qO00Z99OpiaIG5vZxVtiqZV8C7bpwIDAQAB";
encryptor = new JSEncrypt();
encryptor.setPublicKey(key);
var newString = encryptor.encrypt('Password');
console.log("Encrypted password =",newString);
}
Initially I was getting Reference Error for undefined JSEncrypt.
So I downoaded jsencrypt.js file and added var encryptor = require("./jsencrypt.js");at the begining. Now I am getting following error:
Message:
ReferenceError: navigator is not defined
Stacktrace:
ReferenceError: navigator is not defined
at e:\Praveen Data\Projects\ECP\CentralRegistryUI\TestScripts\Utils\jsencrypt.js:73:13
at Object.<anonymous> (e:\Praveen Data\Projects\ECP\CentralRegistryUI\TestScripts\Utils\jsencrypt.js:4342:3)
at require (module.js:385:17)
Tried using windows.navigator in jsencrypt.js, but didn't work.
Protractor tests are not run in browser environment but in node.js, because of that navigator object is not available there. JSEncrypt relies on it to work on the client side across different browsers and versions.
It's referenced in many places in the JSEncrypt code so my best bet would be to either switch to a server side encryption library that would work for you or if not possible mock a global navigator json object with all expected properties/methods as if it was a Chrome browser - node.js runs on chrome's js engine so should work fine.
One of my colleague helped me with the solution.
So here I have a function for encryption:
this.initializeEncryptedPassword = () => {
//console.log("before calling encrypt... ");
browser.executeScript(() => {
//console.log("Starting to return encryptor...");
return window.loginEncryptor.encrypt(window.loginPassword);
}).then((encryptedPassword) => {
this.encryptedPassword = encryptedPassword;
});
//console.log("after calling encrypt...");
}
This function is being called by:
export default class Encryptor {
constructor($window, $http) {
'ngInject';
this.encryptor = new $window.JSEncrypt();
//Need to use HTTP here instead of resource since the resource does not return plain text.
//Getting Public Key by hitting a rest uri.
$http({method: "GET", url: "/xyz/authenticate"}).success((item) => {
this.encryptor.setPublicKey(item);
//set the current encryptor on the window so that testing can use it
$window.loginEncryptor = this.encryptor;
});
}
encryptPassword(credentials) {
credentials.password = this.encryptor.encrypt(credentials.password);
}
}
Hope this help others.
before require('jsencrypt') you can write first:
const { JSDOM } = require('jsdom');
const jsdom = new JSDOM('<!doctype html><html><body></body></html>');
const { window } = jsdom;
global.window = window;
global.document = window.document;
global.navigator ={userAgent: 'node.js'};
const { JSEncrypt } = require('jsencrypt')
You can mock by doing the following:
global.navigator = { appName: 'protractor' };
global.window = {};
const JSEncrypt = require('JSEncrypt').default;
I've used Umbraco 7.3 in my project. I created a custom data type but when I want to call a Surfacecontroller in here is HelloSurfaceController or Hello2SurfaceController, I got an error in umbraco backoffice that said Request error: The URL returned a 404 (not found):
I studied some articles about routing but I couldn't solve my problem. I don't know that where I did wrong.
How can I solve this problem?
Reply.controller.js:
angular.module("umbraco")
.controller("Reply.controller", function ($scope, $http) {
$scope.SendReply = function () {
var sendTo = $("#Email").val();
var textMessage = $("#TextMessage").val();
$scope.xxx = "I'm here!";
var data = { SendTo: sendTo, TextMessage: textMessage };
// ~/Hello2Surface/ReplyMessage ---> Cannot find this URL
$http.post("~/App_Plugins/Reply/HelloSurface/ReplyMessage") // Can not find this URL
.then(function (response) {
alert("YES!");
//TODO:
});
}
});
SurfaceController
namespace Jahan.Nuts.Web.Mvc.UmbracoCms.App.App_Plugins.Reply
{
public class HelloSurfaceController : SurfaceController
{
[HttpPost][ChildActionOnly]
public ActionResult ReplyMessage()
{
//TODO: how should be write this method that be proper for getting data from angularjs?
return null;
}
}
}
package.manifest
{
propertyEditors: [
{
alias: "Send.Reply",
name: "Send Reply",
editor:{
view:"~/App_Plugins/Reply/Reply.html"
},
}
]
,
javascript:[
'~/App_Plugins/Reply/Reply.controller.js'
]
}
Reply.html
<div ng-controller="Reply.controller">
<div style="width: 100%;">
<input type="button" value="Send Reply" title="SendReply" name="Send Reply" ng-click="SendReply()" />
</div>
<div>
<input type="text" ng-model="xxx" name="message" />
</div>
Error in umbraco backoffice:
Take a closer look at the documentation - in particular the Plugin-based SurfaceControllers section:
https://our.umbraco.org/documentation/Reference/Routing/surface-controllers
try doing this (note the PluginController attribute):
namespace Jahan.Nuts.Web.Mvc.UmbracoCms.App.App_Plugins.Reply
{
[PluginController("Reply")]
public class HelloSurfaceController : SurfaceController
{
[HttpPost][ChildActionOnly]
public ActionResult ReplyMessage()
{
//TODO: how should be write this method that be proper for getting data from angularjs?
return null;
}
}
}
Other Notes:
You don't need to include "Surface" in the controller name anymore - simply calling it HelloController is enough.
Don't use a SurfaceController for Api calls if you're using it with AngularJS - Better to use an UmbracoApiController instead. Check out https://our.umbraco.org/documentation/Reference/Routing/WebApi/ for more information (including notes on where to expect the Api Endpoint to be)
You might also want to re-locate your controller so it's in a more conventional spot. There's no problem with putting it in the ~/Controllers directory even if it is a Plugin Controller.
Edit: Added "correct" way to do this:
As noted above, to implement an UmbracoApiController, you want a class looking like this - note you can use UmbracoApiController if you don't need to worry about authorization:
namespace Jahan.Nuts.Web.Mvc.UmbracoCms.App.App_Plugins.Reply
{
[PluginController("Reply")]
public class HelloApiController : UmbracoAuthorizedApiController
{
public void PostReplyMessage(string to, string message)
{
// TODO: process your message and then return something (if you want to).
}
}
}
Then in AngularJS set up a resource like this:
function replyResource($q, $http, umbDataFormatter, umbRequestHelper) {
var replyResource = {
sendMessage: function (sendTo, msg) {
return umbRequestHelper.resourcePromise(
$http.post("Backoffice/Reply/HelloApi/PostReplyMessage?" +
umbRequestHelper.dictionaryToQueryString(
[{ to: sendTo }, { message: msg }])),
'Failed to send message to ' + sendTo + ': ' + msg);
}
};
return replyResource;
}
angular.module('umbraco.resources').factory('replyResource', replyResource);
and finally your actual view controller can use this as follows:
angular.module("umbraco")
.controller("Reply.controller", function ($scope, $http, $injector) {
// Get a reference to our resource - this is why we need the $injector specified above
replyResource = $injector.get('replyResource');
$scope.SendReply = function () {
// You really shouldn't use jQuery here - learn to use AngularJS Bindings instead and bind your model properly.
var sendTo = $("#Email").val();
var textMessage = $("#TextMessage").val();
replyResource.sendMessage(sendTo, textMessage)
.then(function (response) {
// Success
}, function (err) {
// Failure
});
}
};
});
It's possible there's some errors in there; I did it mostly from memory - in particular, you may need to look into the best way to post data to the ApiController - it's not likely that it'll just accept the two parameters like that.
For a more complete example, consider reviewing the code of the Umbraco MemberListView plugin: https://github.com/robertjf/umbMemberListView
Also, you really should read up on the ASP.Net MVC fundamentals and the Umbraco Documentation for SurfaceControllers and APIControllers I've listed above already.
remove the "Surface" from the URL and include "backoffice":
angular.module("umbraco")
.controller("Reply.controller", function ($scope, $http) {
$scope.SendReply = function () {
var sendTo = $("#Email").val();
var textMessage = $("#TextMessage").val();
$scope.xxx = "I'm here!";
var data = { SendTo: sendTo, TextMessage: textMessage };
// ~/Hello2Surface/ReplyMessage ---> Cannot find this URL
$http.post("backoffice/Reply/Hello/ReplyMessage") // Can not find this URL
.then(function (response) {
alert("YES!");
//TODO:
});
}
});
Also, I'd recommend using UmbracoAuthorizedController not a surface controller as this is being used in the back end by logged in users it'll be wise to keep it secure.
So instead your controller should look something like this:
[PluginController("Reply")]
namespace Jahan.Nuts.Web.Mvc.UmbracoCms.App.App_Plugins.Reply
{
public class HelloApiController : UmbracoAuthorizedJsonController
{
public [Model-to-be-returned-to-angular] ReplyMessage()
{
//sql query etc to populate model
//return model
}
}
}
I am having a bit of difficulty figuring out why I am getting 401 Unauthorized status from service framework. At the moment I have it setup to allow everyone to do as they please but that because when I try to enable authorisation I get 401 error code.
//[SupportedModules("Boards")]
//[DnnModuleAuthorize(AccessLevel = SecurityAccessLevel.View)]
[AllowAnonymous]
public class BoardsServiceController : DnnApiController
{ ... }
The strange thing is I have another module which is more than happy to work away with DnnModuleAuthorize
[SupportedModules("Assignments")]
[DnnModuleAuthorize(AccessLevel = SecurityAccessLevel.View)]
public class AsgnsServiceController : DnnApiController
{ ... }
In both cases I have checked to make sure the user has permissions to view the page on which the module lives.
I have cross referenced both projects and everything seems to be spot on. Yet one is working away just fine and the other one returns 401.
Any suggestions?
Update
For Assignments module I am mostly using jQuery style of ajax request just because I haven't got around to revising the module. So a typical GET request would look something like this:
$.ajax({
type: "GET",
url: sf.getServiceRoot( "Assignments" ) + "AsgnsService/GetAssignments",
data: data,
beforeSend: sf.setModuleHeaders
}).done( function ( items ) {
//removed for brevity
}).fail( function ( xhr, result, status ) {
//removed for brevity
});
As for Boards module the code structure is slightly different due knockout implementation. There is a dedicated ServiceCaller but it all boils down to the same ajax call to the server except that instead of having full blown ajax call defined as above it looks much neater.
var that = this;
that.serviceCaller = new dnn.boards.ServiceCaller($, this.moduleId, 'BoardsService');
var success = function (model) {
if (typeof model !== "undefined" && model != null) {
viewModel = new boardViewModel(model.colLists);
ko.bindingHandlers.sortable.beforeMove = viewModel.verifyAssignments;
ko.bindingHandlers.sortable.afterMove = viewModel.updateLastAction;
// normally, we apply moduleScope as a second parameter
ko.applyBindings(viewModel, settings.moduleScope);
}
//console.log('success', model);
};
var failure = function (response, status) {
console.log('request failure: ' + status);
};
var params = {
BoardId: this.boardId
};
that.serviceCaller.get('GetBoardLists', params, success, failure);
And the ServiceCaller ajax function itself looks like this:
function (httpMethod, method, params, success, failure, synchronous) {
var options = {
url: that.getRoot() + method,
beforeSend: that.services.setModuleHeaders,
type: httpMethod,
async: synchronous == false,
success: function (d) {
if (typeof (success) != 'undefined') {
success(d || {});
}
},
error: function (xhr, textStatus, errorThrown) {
if (typeof (failure) != 'undefined') {
var message = undefined;
if (xhr.getResponseHeader('Content-Type').indexOf('application/json') == 0) {
try {
message = $.parseJSON(xhr.responseText).Message;
} catch (e) {
}
}
failure(xhr, message || errorThrown);
}
}
};
if (httpMethod == 'GET') {
options.data = params;
} else {
options.contentType = 'application/json; charset=utf-8';
options.data = ko.toJSON(params);
options.dataType = 'json';
}
$.ajax(options);
};
This would be the two GET requests from two different modules where one is happy and the other throws a status 401 when I enable the same annotations.
Does this provide any clues?
Update
Now in saying all of the above if one takes a look at the original Boards module code base one will notice [DnnAuthorize] annotation attached to every function.
During module revision I removed all instances of [DnnAuthorize] annotation and replaced it with two of my own on the service class itself.
When I add [DnnAuthorize] as annotation on service class itself things work as expected. So why [SupportedModules("Boards")] and [DnnModuleAuthorize(AccessLevel = SecurityAccessLevel.View)] combination doesn't !?
I am not sure but working with the WebAPI you have to register the Service Framework anti forgery stuff
ServicesFramework.Instance.RequestAjaxAntiForgerySupport();
This is part of asking the API to work with a specific module.
I've tried to understand this post regarding this concept, however, I'm failing to get it. I have the following simple setup:
/server/test.js
Meteor.methods({
abc: function() {
var result = {};
result.foo = "Hello ";
result.bar = "World!";
return result;
}
});
/client/myapp.js
var q = Meteor.call('abc');
console.log(q);
This structure returns to the console undefined.
If I change the myapp.js file to:
Meteor.call('abc', function(err, data) {
!err ? console.log(data) : console.log(err);
}
I receive the Object in my console.
Ideally this is what I'd like to be able to do, but it doesn't work, stating in the console: Cannot read property 'greeting' of undefined
/client/myapp.js
var q = Meteor.call('abc');
Template.hello.greeting = function() {
return q.foo;
}
Any help in passing the data from the server object into the template would be greatly appreciated. I'm still learning JavaScript & Meteor.
Thanks!
From the Meteor.call documentation:
On the client, if you do not pass a callback and you are not inside a stub, call will return undefined, and you will have no way to get the return value of the method. That is because the client doesn't have fibers, so there is not actually any way it can block on the remote execution of a method.
So, you'll want to do it like this:
Meteor.call('abc', function(err, data) {
if (err)
console.log(err);
Session.set('q', data);
});
Template.hello.greeting = function() {
return Session.get('q').foo;
};
This will reactively update the template once the data is available.
This happens because Npm.require has Async behavior. That's the reason that you have to write a callback for Meteor.call.
But there is a solution, just use install(mrt add npm) and you'll get a function named Meteor.sync(//...) with this you can do both games: sync and async in your Meteor.call().
Reference: http://www.sitepoint.com/create-a-meteor-app-using-npm-module/
You can get the return value of a Meteor method for use in a template by using a reactive variable. Check out the working demonstration on Meteorpad
I went for a ghetto solution. But, it works for me, which is what matters, to me. Below is my code, which, in concept, I think, solves OP's problem.
In the client's main.js:
Meteor.setInterval(function() {
confirmLogin();
}, 5000);
This runs the confirmLogin() function every five seconds.
The confirmLogin function (in the client's main.js):
function confirmLogin() {
Meteor.call('loggedIn', function (error, result) {
Session.set("loggedIn", result);
});
}
The loggedIn method (in the server's main.js):
loggedIn: function () {
var toReturn = false;
var userDetails = Meteor.user();
if (typeof userDetails["services"] !== "undefined") {
if (typeof userDetails["services"]["facebook"] != "undefined") {
toReturn = true;
}
}
return toReturn;
},
The relevant helper:
loggedIn: function () {
return Session.get("loggedIn");
}
How do I pass the jsonObj from the javascript code in getJson to the java code handleJsonResponse. If my syntax is correct, what do I do with a JavaScriptObject?
I know that the jsonObj contains valid data because alert(jsonObj.ResultSet.totalResultsAvailable) returns a large number :) --- but some how it's not getting passed correctly back into Java.
EDIT: I solved it... by passing in jsonObj.ResultSet.Result to the java function and working on it using a JSONArray.
Thanks.
public native static void getJson(int requestId, String url, MyClass handler) /*-{
alert(url);
var callback = "callback" + requestId;
var script = document.createElement("script");
script.setAttribute("src", url+callback);
script.setAttribute("type", "text/javascript");
window[callback] = function(jsonObj) { // jsonObj DOES contain data
handler.#com.michael.random.client.MyClass::handleJsonResponse(Lcom/google/gwt/core/client/JavaScriptObject;)(jsonObj);
window[callback + "done"] = true;
}
document.body.appendChild(script);
}-*/;
public void handleJsonResponse(JavaScriptObject jso) { // How to utilize JSO
if (jso == null) { // Now the code gets past here
Window.alert("Couldn't retrieve JSON");
return;
}
Window.alert(jso.toSource()); // Alerts 'null'
JSONArray array = new JSONArray(jso);
//Window.alert(""+array.size());
}
}
Not exactly sure how to fix this problem that I had, but I found a workaround. The javascript jsonObj is is multidimensional, and I didn't know how to manipulate the types in the java function. So instead, I passed jsonObj.ResultSet.Result to my function handler, and from there I was able to use get("string") on the JSONArray.
What is toSource() supposed to do? (The documentation I see for it just says "calls toSource".) What about toString()?
If your call to alert(jsonObj.ResultSet.totalResultsAvailable) yields a valid result, that tells me jsonObj is a JavaScript Object, not an Array. Looks to me like the constructor for JSONArray only takes a JS Array (e.g., ["item1", "item2", {"key":"value"}, ...] )