I am beginning with Solidity and have begun experiencing this problem in my Contract. I created a test case to show the issue(pictured below with console log included) that is also getting the same error. Functions and events are not being recognized in the call graph and I am not quite sure why because they are explicitly there.
Related
I have used many discord API wrappers, but as an experienced python developer, unfortunately I somehow still do not understand how a command gets called!
#client.command()
async demo(ctx):
channel = ctx.channel
await channel.send(f'Demonstration')
Above a command has been created (function) and it is placed after its decorator #client.command()
To my understanding, the decorator is in a way, a "check" performed before running the function (demo) but I do not understand how the discord.py library seemingly "calls" the demo function.....?? Is there some form of short/long polling system in the local imported discord.py library which polls the discord API and receives a list of jobs/messages and checks these against the functions the user has created?
I would love to know how this works as I dont understand what "calls" the functions that the user makes, and this would allow me to make my own wrapper for another similar social media platform! Many thanks in advance.
I am trying to work out how functions created by the user are seemingly "called" by the discord.py library. I have worked with the discord.py wrapper and other API wrappers before.
(See source code attached at the bottom of the answer)
The #bot.command() decorator adds a command to the internal lists/mappings of commands stored in the Bot instance.
Whenever a message is received, this runs through Bot.process_commands. It can then look through every command stored to check if the message starts with one of them (prefix is checked beforehand). If it finds a match, then it can invoke it (the underlying callback is stored in the Command instance).
If you've ever overridden an on_message event and your commands stopped working, then this is why: that method is no longer being called, so it no longer tries to look through your commands to find a match.
This uses a dictionary to make it far more efficient - instead of having to iterate over every single command & alias available, it only has to check if the first letters of the message match anything at all.
The commands.Command() decorator used in Cogs works slightly different. This turns your function into a Command instance, and when adding a cog (using Bot.add_cog()) the library checks every attribute to see if any of them are Command instances.
References to source code
GroupMixin.command() (called when you use #client.command()): https://github.com/Rapptz/discord.py/blob/24bdb44d54686448a336ea6d72b1bf8600ef7220/discord/ext/commands/core.py#L1493
As you can see, it calls add_command() internally to add it to the list of commands.
Adding commands (GroupMixin.add_command()): https://github.com/Rapptz/discord.py/blob/24bdb44d54686448a336ea6d72b1bf8600ef7220/discord/ext/commands/core.py#L1315
Bot.process_commands(): https://github.com/Rapptz/discord.py/blob/master/discord/ext/commands/bot.py#L1360
You'll have to follow the chain - most of the processing actually happens in get_context which tries to create a Context instance out of the message: https://github.com/Rapptz/discord.py/blob/24bdb44d54686448a336ea6d72b1bf8600ef7220/discord/ext/commands/bot.py#L1231
commands.Command(): https://github.com/Rapptz/discord.py/blob/master/discord/ext/commands/core.py#L1745
When working on a SolidJS project you might start seeing the following warning message in your JS console:
computations created outside a `createRoot` or `render` will never be disposed
There are some information available on this in SolidJS' Github repository issues. But after reading them I was still not quite sure what this was all about and whether my code was really doing something wrong.
I managed to track down where it came from and find a fix for it based on the documentation. So I'm providing the explanation and the solution for those Googling this warning message.
In essence this is a warning about a possibility of a memory leak due to a reactive computation being created without the proper context which would dispose of it when no longer needed.
A proper context is created a couple of different ways. Here are the ones I know about:
By using the render function.
By using the createRoot function. Under the hood render uses this.
By using the createContext function.
The first is by far the most common way, because each app has at least one render function call to get the whole show started.
So what makes the code go "out of context"?
Probably the most common way is via async calls. The context creation with its dependency tree happens only when the synchronous portion of the code finishes running. This includes all the export default function in your modules and the main app function.
But code that runs at a later time because of a setTimeout or by being in an async function will be outside of this context and any reactive computations created will not be tracked and might stick around without being garbage collected.
An example
Let's say you have a data input screen and have a Save button on it that makes an API call to your server to save the data. And you want to provide a feedback to the user whether the operation succeeded or not, with a nice HTML formatted message.
[msg,setMsg] = createSignal(<></>)
async function saveForm(){
...
setMsg(<p>Saving your data.<i>Please stand by...</i></p>)
const result=await callApi('updateUser',formData)
if(result.ok){
setMsg(<p>Your changes were <b>successfully</b> saved!</p> )
} else {
setMsg(<p>There was a problem saving your data! <br>Error: </p><pre>{result.error}</pre> )
}
}
...
<div>
...
<button onClick={saveForm} >Save</button>
{msg()}
</div>
This will produce the above mentioned warning when the API call returns an error, but not the other times. Why?
The reason for this is that SolidJS considers the code inserts inside JSX to be reactive, ie: need to be watched and re-evaluated. So inserting the error message from the API call creates a reactive computation.
The solution
I found the solution at the very end of the SolidJS doc. It's a special JSX modifier: /*#once*/
It can be used at the beginning of a curly brace expression and it tells the SolidJS compiler to explicitly not to make this a reactive expression. In other words: it will evaluated once and only once when the DOM nodes are created from the JSX.
In the above example here's how to use it:
setMsg(<p>There was a problem saving your data! <br>Error: </p><pre>{/*#once*/ result.error}</pre> )
After this there will be no more warning messages :)
In my case, I had an input and when that input changed I re-created an SVG drawing. Because the SVG creation was an expensive operation, I added a debounce in the createEffect function which ran when the input changed. debounce is a technique to defer the processing until the input stops changing for at least X amount of time. It involved running the SVG generation code inside the setTimeout function, thus being outside of the main context. Using the /*#once*/ modifier everywhere where I inserted an expression in the generated JSX has fixed the problem.
In my Coded UI Test project, I need to check if few Labels or Messages are consistent with the context. But those checks are not critical if not consistent and I need to output them only as warnings.
Note that I'm using nested ordered tests to use only one global ordered test with vstest.console.exe and get in one shot the overall test coverage report.
Till now I was creating assertions to check those consistencies, but an assertion failure leads to Test failure, then to ordered test failure and then to playback stop.
I tried to change Playback.PlaybackSettings.ContinueOnError value before and after the assertion: this works as I expect as the assertion is well reported as a warning in the html report file. But whatever, it causes the ordered test to stop and then my global ordered test chaining to fail...
I tried to use TestContext.WriteLine too instead of creating assert, but it seems that this is not output in the html report.
So my question is:
is there any way to create an assertion only as a Warning that will be output in the html report file and that doesn't lead to a test failure?
Thanks a lot for any answer and help on this ;)
So I got my solution with developping my own Warning Engine to integrate Warnings in test report, 'cause I found no existing solution for that with the current Coded UI Test Assertion engine.
I'll try to take some time to post generic parts of the code structure with comments translated in english (we're french so default comments are french for now...), but here are the main step lines :
Create a template based on the UITestActionLog.html original file
report structure of Coded UI Test engine, with only the start
bloc and the javascript functions and CSS declarations in it.
Create an assertion class with a main function to manage insertion
of Warning html bloc in the html report first created from the template.
Then create custom assert functions to call the main function
whereever on runtime, and custom Stopwatch to inject elapsed time in
the report ('cause I could'nt found a way to get back the elapsed
time directly from the Coded UI Test engine).
That's it.
Just a proposition as a way to do it, maybe not the best one but it worked for me. I'll try to take time to put blocl codes to be clearer on it.
I was wondering how to make it so the rest of the program runs when one component fails to (and therefor the rest of the path that relied on this component is incapacitated as well). In other languages, this is equivalent to "catching an exception," but the added issue here is that I'm afraid that even if such a feature existed (cant find if it does), then the rest of the program would still try to run... Any advice would be very much appreciated. Thanks in advance!
LabVIEW doesn't have exception handling, but handles error in a different way: (nearly) all VIs accept an error cluster as input (and so should yours); if it is positive (an error occurred), the VI will return immediately, passing error as output, and next will get it as input, etc. This is called error.
As all these VIs transmit this cluster between each others you will get it in your top-level VI, so if error occurs you just have to cleanup stuff correctly it and exit.
I been using the WebService and Operation classes of Flex Framework for a while, and after some ups and downs (more downs than ups, haha) I'm in process of refactoring all its uses with some utility classes/wrappers.
After browsing a little of the code of mx.rpc.soap.Operation I noticed that when you use the method "send" and the web service is not ready then the call is queued to an internal array (pendingInvocations:Array in line 1142). But the funny thing is that the invocations in the queue are never called again.
This is a bug or there is something I'm doing wrong?
I'm considering extending mx.rpc.soap.Operation, overriding "send" and testing if there are invocation queued, calling invokeAllPending (a mx_internal method that pops all the queued invocations) my self.
But the other problem is that that method is mx_internal, so I don't know if Adobe is gonna change it any time soon.
Any advice?
Thanks in advance
It's not a bug. Take a look at the definition for AbstractWebService; it defines a method called unEnqueueCalls (which is right up near the top of the list of awkward method names that I've seen :)). This method loops through all the operations in the webservice and invokes the pending calls for each operation by calling that invokeAllPending method you found.
unEnqueueCalls is itself called from the WebService class, in the wsdlFault and wsdlHandler methods, one of which runs when your WSDL is finished loading.
So, everything is all accounted for; you don't need to override anything.