I have this piece of code in the constructor of a class.
rules = rulesEngineRepository.GetRules(x => x.Enabled);
foreach (var rule in rules)
{
var ruleAssembly = Assembly.LoadFrom($"{rule.AssemblyName}.dll");
kernel.Register(Component.For(ruleAssembly.GetType()).LifestyleSingleton());
}
The Assembly.LoadFrom() statement works as expected and loads the assembly correctly, but the following kernel.Register() call doesn't appear to register the component.
When it's accessed later on, Castle.Windsor blows up with a "failed to activate" and an inner exception of "No component for supporting the service...". Clearly, the component isn't registered.
Could someone point out where I'm going wrong here? Thanks.
The Component.For(ruleAssembly.GetType()) will create a component for System.Reflection.Assembly. I'm guessing what you wanted was to either have something using ruleAssembly.GetExportedTypes() or something along the lines of:
container.Register(
Classes.FromAssembly(ruleAssembly)
.FurtherConfigurationHere()
)
Related
I want to create a controller based JavaFX GUI consisting of multiple controllers.
The task I can't accomplish is to pass parameters from one Scene to another AND back.
Or in other words:
The MainController loads SubController's fxml, passes an object to SubController, switches the scene. There shall not be two open windows.
After it's work is done, the SubController shall then switch the scene back to the MainController and pass some object back.
This is where I fail.
This question is very similar to this one but still unanswered. Passing Parameters JavaFX FXML
It was also mentioned in the comments:
"This work when you pass parameter from first controller to second but how to pass parameter from second to first controller,i mean after first.fxml was loaded.
– Xlint Xms Sep 18 '17 at 23:15"
I used the first approach in the top answer of that thread.
Does anyone have a clue how to achieve this without external libs?
There are numerous ways to do this.
Here is one solution, which passes a Consumer to another controller. The other controller can invoke the consumer to accept the result once it has completed its work. The sample is based on the example code from an answer to the question that you linked.
public Stage showCustomerDialog(Customer customer) {
FXMLLoader loader = new FXMLLoader(
getClass().getResource(
"customerDialog.fxml"
)
);
Stage stage = new Stage(StageStyle.DECORATED);
stage.setScene(
new Scene(
(Pane) loader.load()
)
);
Consumer<CustomerInteractionResult> onComplete = result -> {
// update main screen based upon result.
};
CustomerDialogController controller =
loader.<CustomerDialogController>getController();
controller.initData(customer, onComplete);
stage.show();
return stage;
}
...
class CustomerDialogController() {
#FXML private Label customerName;
private Consumer<CustomerInteractionResult> onComplete
void initialize() {}
void initData(Customer customer, Consumer<CustomerInteractionResult> onComplete) {
customerName.setText(customer.getName());
this.onComplete = onComplete;
}
#FXML
void onSomeInteractionLikeCloseDialog(ActionEvent event) {
onComplete.accept(new CustomerInteractionResult(someDataGatheredByDialog));
}
}
Another way to do this is to add a result property to the controller of the dialog screen and interested invokers could listen to or retrieve the result property. A result property is how the in-built JavaFX dialogs work, so you would be essentially imitating some of that functionality.
If you have a lot of this passing back and forth stuff going on, a shared dependency injection model based on something like Gluon Ignite, might assist you.
I've used AfterBurner.fx for dependency injection, which is very slick and powerful as long as you follow the conventions. It's not necessarily an external lib if you just copy the 3 classes into your structure. Although you do need the javax Inject jar, so I guess it is an eternal reference.
Alternately, if you have a central "screen" from which most of your application branches out you could use property binding probably within a singleton pattern. There are some good articles on using singleton in JavaFX, like this one. I did that for a small application that works really great, but defining all of those bindings can get out of hand if there are a lot of properties.
To pass data back, the best approach is probably to fire custom Events, which the parent controller subscribes to with Node::addEventHandler. See How to emit and handle custom events? for context.
In complex cases when the two controllers have no reference to each other, a Event Bus as #jewelsea mentioned is the superior option.
For overall architecture, this Reddit comment provides some good detail: https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/7c4vhv/are_there_any_canonical_javafx_design_patterns/dpnsedh/
I have a jodd project that uses Proxetta and JTX for creating transactions over services classes. The issue is that when I try to debug a service class I receive :
Unable to install breakpoint due to missing line number attributes
I suspect that there has something to do with they way Proxetta generates my proxies classes as it seems that in Spring if you have no interface for a class the same happens.
I use Eclispe and here how Proxetta is initialized:
public void initProxetta() {
ProxyAspect txServiceProxy = new ProxyAspect(AnnotationTxAdvice.class,
new MethodAnnotationPointcut(Transaction.class) {
#Override
public boolean apply(MethodInfo mi) {
return isPublic(mi) &&
isTopLevelMethod(mi) &&
matchClassName(mi, "*ServiceImpl") &&
super.apply(mi);
}
});
proxetta = ProxyProxetta.withAspects(txServiceProxy);
proxetta.setClassLoader(this.getClass().getClassLoader());
}
Would you please try the following quickstart webapp1 example?
Its gradle project, so you can quickly import it in any IDE. In this example, we create proxy almost exactly like you above, but on actions (which should not make a difference). Now try to put a breakpoint into the IndexAction - this one gets proxified, for example. I am able to put break point there in IntelliJ IDEA.
Moreover, I dunno why Eclipse complains about the breakpoint in the service implementation class, since Proxetta as you used above creates a proxy subclass, and does not change the target class in any way. So when you put breakpoint in the service implementation code, it is in your class, not proxy class.
Finally, did you put BP on the method, or inside the code? If it is the first (on the method), then please try to put the BP inside the code of your service: eg on first line of the method body.
I´m developing an App that will be available for Windows Phone 8 and the Windows Store. To reduce redundancy I´m using a Portable Class Library (PCL) and on top of that I'm trying to apply the MVVM pattern with the help of the MVVM Light PCL Toolkit. The ViewModels are placed in the PCL and are bound directly in the XAML of the Apps pages.
When the data is received without an error, everything works fine. But I don´t know how to get the exceptions/error message back to the App when errors do happen.
Inside the Windows Store App errors will show as a MessageDialog while the Wp8 App will use the MessageBox class. Obviously the PCL isn´t aware of any of these classes. What I´m not getting is how to know if a ViewModel ran into an error, and how to get the message inside the App. Is this even possible when the ViewModels are bound inside the XAML?
The code in the ViewModel (inside the PCL) looks like this:
DataService.Authenticate((token, error) =>
{
if (error != null)
{
// This is, obviously, not going to work.
MessageBox.Show(error.Message);
return;
}
Token = token;
});
So I have to save the error somehow and let the App itself know the error has occurred, and then call the matching way of showing the error to the user.
Currently I´m thinking of something like defining an Error-property inside the BaseViewModel and fill it when errors in the ViewModel occur. Then, in the CodeBehind of the pages, make them aware of the current ViewModel and bind a PropertyChanged-event to this Error-property. But I was not able to implement it yet, so I don't know if this is even the right way to go.
Do I have to step down from the idea to bind the ViewModels inside the XAML, and do I instead have to initialize them inside the pages Codebehind?
Your instinct is correct, but there are more than a few ways of going about this.
First and foremost, you can use Mvvm's Messaging library, which will allow your ViewModel to send messages directly to your View. Your View can then handle it in any way it wishes, including but not limited to using a MessageDialog.
Secondly, you can also create a Function or Action (likely the former) in your ViewModelLocator for ShowMessageDialog. This Function will likely take a string and return a Task. Then, after you initialize your ViewModelLocator initially, you can inject your ShowMessageDialog code. Your ViewModels can then use whatever platform's MessageDialogs that they please.
Ex:
Note: This code uses the BCL Async libraries that are accessible in Nuget. They work in the PCL just fine.
ViewModelLocator:
public static Func<string, Task> ShowMessageDialog { get; set; }
App.xaml.cs:
ViewModelLocator.ShowMessageDialog = (message) =>
{
// For Windows Phone
return TaskFactory.StartNew(() => MessageBox.Show(message));
// For Windows 8
MessageDialog md = new MessageDialog(message);
return md.ShowAsync().AsTask();
};
ViewModel:
await ViewModelLocator.ShowMessageDialog("This is my message.");
Secondary Note: The md.ShowAsync().AsTask(); must be run on the UI Thread. This means that you will have to invoke it via the dispatcher in the case that you are running it in a task asynchronously. This is possible using a similar method of injecting the use of the app's CoreDispatcher via the RunAsync method.
This means that you can, on any platform (Windows 8 and Windows Phone shown above), inject whatever Message Dialog system you want and use it in your PCL.
I would say that it is much easier to do the first method I suggested, as that is what it is there for, but the Function method version is definitely helpful at times.
I have created a custom event that I want to use to pass a string between two modules. The event looks like this:
package com.mypackage.events
{
import flash.events.Event;
public class ThumbDeleteEvent extends Event
{
public static const THUMBS_DELETED:String = "thumbsDeleted";
public var files:String;
public function ThumbDeleteEvent(type:String, files:String)
{
super(type);
this.files = files;
}
// Override the inherited clone() method.
override public function clone():Event {
return new ThumbDeleteEvent(type, files);
}
}
}
In one module I dispatch the event like so:
parentApplication.dispatchEvent(new ThumbDeleteEvent("parentApplication.thumbsDeleted", files));
and in another module I listen for the event like so:
public function init():void {
parentApplication.addEventListener("parentApplication.thumbsDeleted", onThumbsDelete);
}
if I use ThumbsDeleteEvent as the type passed in to the listener function like this:
public function onThumbsDelete(evt:ThumbDeleteEvent):void{
trace("thumb delete event for thumbs: "+evt.files);
}
I get the following error:
TypeError: Error #1034: Type Coercion failed: cannot convert com.mypackage.events::ThumbDeleteEvent#26748a31 to com.mypackage.events.ThumbDeleteEvent.
if I just use Event as the type passed in to the listener function like this:
public function onThumbsDelete(evt:ThumbDeleteEvent):void{
if(evt is ThumbDeleteEvent){
trace("thumb delete event for thumbs: "+(evt as ThumbDeleteEvent).files);
}else{
var type:XML = describeType(evt);
trace(type.toXMLString());
}
}
It works but does not think it is a ThumbDeleteEvent type class (it hits the else statement) the xml output of describe type says its type is:
type name="com.mypackage.events::ThumbDeleteEvent"
What is going on here? If I put a breakpoint in the debugger it says the event is a ThumbDeleteEvent and I can see the files parameter and its right???
The issue here is that one swf has their definition of that class, and then the other swf has its own version of that exact same class. When trying to cast between them flash does a bytecode-check to see if the definitions are the same, and if you ever changed something in that as file without updating both with the exact same info you will run into this issue. That is, compile both swf-files, then change a space in the as-file, and compile only one swf file.
Urgh it's coming back to me, all those issues with shared code between different modules. I always just slug my way through these errors until I get it to work and can never really remember what it is since it can be so many issues.
Make sure both compiled swf-files have up-to-date-versions of the file.
Make sure both swf-files have same linkage-nesting to the code-file.
If that doesn't work [can't really remember since this issue is kind of like solve-once and copy to every other project].
See in which order things are added to ApplicationDomain and make sure nothing else has their own out-of-date-version of it through something imported in flash library
Move shared code into seperate code library linked in with "dynamic binding"
Try with sharing the Interface instead
Change how assets are loaded into the ApplicationDomain
Hopefully someone has more knowledge of this issue and can tell exactly what steps to use, but this is at least a starting point... I might have more time to research this and write a post about it sometime in the future later today.
Edit:
from another SO-thread Custom AS3 Class not Updating
This is the age old problem of what ultimately boils down to is the Verify Error. It happens when you embed "Class A" in one or more applications, modules, swfs, etc. Ultimately every output swf that uses "Class A" must be recompiled when "Class A" is changed. Otherwise you end up with a situation where 1 module has the newer implementation but others don't. This problem is compounded by the fact that the application domain is defined as a "first in wins" when it encounters a Class of the same name / package - meaning if the old one is referenced first, the newer one loaded later gets ignored.
The more permanent solution is to use class promotion to an RSL that ultimately allows the RSL to control the actual "Class A" reference in which it also implements an "IClassAImpl" interface that all modules use. This allows the compiler to cross link the reference with a signature it knows about without actually embedding the actual class itself.
Trying to implement the new FP 10.1 Global error handler into my projects but no matter what I do any uncaught error will still show up the Exception window (both in debug and release versions of the SWF). All I want to do is to prevent these popups but instead send a message to my logger. Here's my code ...
EDIT: I simplified the code now. Could somebody do me a favor and test the following class and see if it's works for him? Because it's doesn't for me! ...
package
{
import flash.display.Sprite;
import flash.events.UncaughtErrorEvent;
public class GlobalErrorHandlerTest extends Sprite
{
public function GlobalErrorHandlerTest()
{
stage.loaderInfo.uncaughtErrorEvents.addEventListener(UncaughtErrorEvent.UNCAUGHT_ERROR, onUncaughtError);
throw new Error();
}
private function onUncaughtError(e:UncaughtErrorEvent):void
{
var message:String;
if (e.error["message"])
{
message = e.error["message"];
}
else if (e.error["text"])
{
message = e.error["text"];
}
else
{
message = e.error["toString"]();
}
trace("Uncaught Error: " + e.text);
}
}
}
I had the same issue as above - I was referencing stage.loadInfo, believing that as that references the stage, it would capture all uncaught errors. However, that doesn't work, you have to actually follow grapefukt's suggestion verbatim: On the actual base display object, place the code
loaderInfo.uncaughtErrorEvents.add...
When you try to place onto stage.loaderInfo or frame.loaderInfo, it has no effect.
In my case, I had to place it in the class that extended the base display object. Very Odd.
The docs say that:
The UncaughtErrorEvents object that dispatches the event is associated with either a LoaderInfo object or a Loader object.
Thus you must listen to the loaderInfo's uncaughtErrorEvents property of your topmost display object:
loaderInfo.uncaughtErrorEvents.addEventListener(UncaughtErrorEvent.UNCAUGHT_ERROR, uncaughtErrorHandler);
UPDATE: I think I may know why you think this isn't working. I made the mistake of testing inside the debugger. When the debugger stopped on the runtime errors I assumed that this proved my uncaughtErrorHandler function was not working. In fact, this was in error. It's just a quirk of the debugger. The debugger will still stop as if it is an unhandled error or exception, but if you press Run again you'll see it DOES execute the error handling code. See my thread Flex 4.0/4.5 global error handling for more info.
Original response:
I am looking for this same info. None of the examples in the API doc nor various blogs on the subject work for me. I've tried just loaderInfo, stage.loaderInfo, systemManager.loaderInfo... It makes no difference. I even tried all of them in a single test case! The addEventListener are being set but the uncaught errors are not firing the uncaughtErrorHandler. Argh. I have wasted far too much time on this! I've reduced it to a very simple program much like above except with all the code in the main mxml file.
How about this: can someone post a Global Error Handling example that DOES work? I'm using Flex SDK 4.1 (I've also tried with 4.5), targeting FP 10.1 (or 10.2 for 4.5), in a mx:Application-based mxml Flex project.
My thread: Flex 4.0/4.5 global error handling
You must set up the listener not to a specific view, but to the main stage object, as it's at the top of the display list (thus picking up any exception of any of its children).