I have a three components: A, B and C.
They are registrered in the following manners:
public class Installer : IWindsorInstaller
{
public void Install(IWindsorContainer container, IConfigurationStore store)
{
container.Register(Component.For<IA>().ImplementedBy<A>());
container.Register(Component.For<IB>().UsingFactoryMethod(Resolve).LifestyleScoped());
container.Register(Component.For<IC>().ImplementedBy<C>().LifestyleScoped());
}
private static IUnitOfWork Resolve(IKernel kernel)
{
IA a = kernel.Resolve<IA>();
B b = new B(a);
kernel.ReleaseComponent(a);
return b;
}
}
When I Resolve C I do it in the following manner:
public void Test()
{
using (ContainerAccessor.Instance.IocContainer.BeginScope())
{
using (IB b = containerAccessor.Instance.IocContainer.Resolve<IB>())
{
IC c = ContainerAccessor.Instance.IocContainer.Resolve<IC>();
...
b.Commit();
return result;
}
}
The first time I access it, an exception is thrown : "InvalidOperationException: Scope was not available. Did you forget to call container.BeginScope()?".
I partly solve it by wrapping the content of the Resolve method with a using (kernel.BeginScope) { ... }.
I said it was partly solved because when I put a breakpoint in the resolve method, it still throws the exception the first time I access it.
Does someone have an idea of what is happening here?
Thanks a lot.
Related
The tested method has the following code:
SuppressWarnings suppressWarnings = method.getAnnotation(SuppressWarnings.class);
In my test method.I mocked java.lang.reflect.Method:
Method method= PowerMock.createMock(Method.class);
SuppressWarnings sw = EasyMock.createMock(SuppressWarnings.class);
EasyMock.expect(method.getAnnotation(SuppressWarnings.class)).andReturn(sw);
In the tested method,
method.getAnnotation(SuppressWarnings.class); always returns null.
I don't know why.Could anyone help me?
//code:
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#Target(ElementType.METHOD)
public #interface Anonymous {
}
public class AnnotationClass {
public Anonymous fun(Method m){
Anonymous anonymous = m.getAnnotation(Anonymous.class);
return anonymous;
}
}
// test class:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(Method.class)
public class AnnotationClassTest {
#Test
public void test() throws NoSuchMethodException, SecurityException {
AnnotationClass testClass = new AnnotationClass();
final Method mockMethod = PowerMock.createMock(Method.class);
final Anonymous mockAnot = EasyMock.createMock(Anonymous.class);
EasyMock.expect(mockMethod.getAnnotation(Anonymous.class)).andReturn(mockAnot);
PowerMock.replay(mockMethod);
final Anonymous act = testClass.fun(mockMethod);
Assert.assertEquals(mockAnot, act);
PowerMock.verify(mockMethod);
}
}
error:
java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<EasyMock for interface
com.unittest.easymock.start.Anonymous> but was:<null>
SuppressWarnings has #Retention(value=SOURCE) which means that it is not available at runtime:
public static final RetentionPolicy SOURCE: Annotations are to be discarded by the compiler.
However, if you would try your code with a different annotation that is available at runtime, method.getAnnotation(MyAnnotation.class) would still return null. That is, because by default the mocked Method will return null for method calls.
I think your problem is in the configuration of the mock, when I run your code (using an annotation that is available at runtime) I get the following exception:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.IllegalStateException: no last call on a mock available
at org.easymock.EasyMock.getControlForLastCall(EasyMock.java:466)
at org.easymock.EasyMock.expect(EasyMock.java:444)
at MockStuff.main(MockStuff.java:54)
This page has some explanations about how to mock a final class (such as Method).
Your code gives the exact same result for me. I was able to get it working using the following code:
#RunWith(PowerMockRunner.class)
#PrepareForTest(Method.class)
public class AnnotationClassTest {
#Test
public void test() throws NoSuchMethodException, SecurityException {
final Method mockMethod = PowerMock.createMock(Method.class);
final Anot mockAnot = EasyMock.createMock(Anot.class);
EasyMock.expect(mockMethod.getAnnotation(Anot.class)).andReturn(mockAnot);
PowerMock.replay(mockMethod);
final Anot methodReturn = mockMethod.getAnnotation(Anot.class);
Assert.assertEquals(mockAnot, methodReturn);
}
}
#Retention(RetentionPolicy.RUNTIME)
#interface Anot {}
Note that this code is self contained, I defined the Anot interface since you didn't give the definition of Anonymous.
Maybe abstract typed factories are not an easy point to start with Windsor (2.5.3 if it matters) but I've got to do it anyway.
I'm trying to build a factory giving back processors depending on message type. So far i've scavenged from different places following code:
public class Complicato
{
public static void Do(string[] args)
{
IKernel kernel = new DefaultKernel();
IWindsorContainer container = new WindsorContainer();
kernel.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Install();
container.Register(
Component.For<HandlerSelector, ITypedFactoryComponentSelector>(),
AllTypes.FromThisAssembly().BasedOn(typeof(ITrier<>))
.WithService.Base().Configure(conf => conf.LifeStyle.Is(LifestyleType.Transient)),
Component.For<Factor>(),
Component.For<ITryFactory>().AsFactory(c => c.SelectedWith<HandlerSelector>()).LifeStyle.Singleton);
var factor = container.Resolve<Factor>();
var factory = container.Resolve<ITryFactory>();
}
}
public class HandlerSelector : DefaultTypedFactoryComponentSelector
{
protected override Type GetComponentType(MethodInfo method, object[] arguments)
{
return typeof(ITrier<>).MakeGenericType(arguments[0].GetType());
}
}
public class Factor
{
private ITryFactory factory;
public void Try(IWhat onto)
{
factory.GetTrier(onto).Try(onto);
}
}
public interface ITryFactory
{
ITrier<IWhat> GetTrier(IWhat onto);
void Release(object elem);
}
public interface IWhat { }
public interface ITrier<in TWhat> where TWhat : IWhat
{
void Try(TWhat input);
}
public class TrierYes : ITrier<WhatYes>
{
public void Try(WhatYes input) { Console.WriteLine("Yes? " + input.Aye()); }
}
public class TrierNo : ITrier<WhatNot>
{
public void Try(WhatNot input) { Console.WriteLine("No? " + input.Naa()); }
}
public class WhatYes : IWhat
{
public bool Aye() { return true; }
}
public class WhatNot : IWhat
{
public bool Naa() { return false; }
}
Main problem here is that id doesn't work. First I get Factor with factory of null and then as a consequence trying to resolve factory explicitely gives me ComponentActivator: could not proxy Factories.Complex.ITryFactory with inner message of The interceptor Castle.TypedFactory.Interceptor could not be resolved and "Keys (components with specific keys) - Castle.TypedFactory.Interceptor which was not registered" in container. I don't even know if the Handler selector works, it's not in question so far.
If I make ITrier not generic - it suddenly starts working but it's definitely not what I'm trying to achieve.
So do I make some silly beginners mistake in Windsor configuration or misunderstand the idea of typed factory?
For completeness sake, here's the exception message:
Castle.MicroKernel.ComponentActivator.ComponentActivatorException was unhandled
Message=ComponentActivator: could not proxy Factories.Complex.ITryFactory
Source=Castle.Windsor
StackTrace:
at Castle.MicroKernel.ComponentActivator.DefaultComponentActivator.CreateInstance(CreationContext context, Object[] arguments, Type[] signature) in e:\OSS.Code\Castle.Windsor\src\Castle.Windsor\MicroKernel\ComponentActivator\DefaultComponentActivator.cs:line 166
InnerException: Castle.MicroKernel.Resolvers.DependencyResolverException
Message=The interceptor Castle.TypedFactory.Interceptor could not be resolved
Source=Castle.Windsor
StackTrace:
at Castle.Core.InterceptorReference.Castle.MicroKernel.IReference<Castle.DynamicProxy.IInterceptor>.Resolve(IKernel kernel, CreationContext context) in e:\OSS.Code\Castle.Windsor\src\Castle.Windsor\Core\InterceptorReference.cs:line 142
And the winner is
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>(); // good code
instead of
kernel.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>(); // bad code
Now I only have the issues of not injected factory and improper HandlerSelector.
NullReference was solved by introducing explicit initializing constructor to the Factor. I don't know why I thought it works without.
Final version of the handler interface is following:
public interface ITrier<out TWhat> where TWhat: IWhat
{
void Try(IWhat input);
}
To permit covariance. Not über-elegant as requires unnecessary cast and handlers loosen their typedness. But this is cruel reality. You're either co or contra-variant.
My colleague set up a Windsor TypedFactoryFacility in our project.
I'm new to Windsor and don't understand how it is implementing the the methods in the IServiceFactory interface we register as a factory. When I saw a Create method that takes a type parameter T and returns a T, I figured that it's probably calling the container's Resolve method under the covers.
I need an overload of Create that takes a Type as a parameter and returns an object. Since the container's Resolve method has both of these flavors:
T Resolve<T>(string key);
object Resolve(Type service);
I thought adding the overload of Create would work. Instead, it appears to be trying to resolve a System.Object instead of the Type I pass in.
Is there a way to make Windsor implement my Create method the way I want it to? I've poked around a bit with reflector, but can't figure it out.
Here is the registration:
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Register(
Component.For<IServiceFactory>()
.AsFactory()
.LifeStyle.Transient);
and the interface itself:
public interface IServiceFactory
{
//Original Create method that works
T Create<T>();
//The overload that I need that throws an exception
object Create(Type service)
void Release(object service);
}
Do you want to call something like serviceFactory.Create(typeof(IMyServce)) instead of serviceFactory.Create<IMyService>()?
Try using reflection in an extension method, like this
public static class ServiceFactoryExtensions
{
public static object Create(this IServiceFactory factory, Type serviceType)
{
return typeof(IServiceFactory).GetMethod("Create")
.MakeGenericMethod(serviceType).Invoke(factory, new object[]{});
}
}
EDIT:
This extension method does indeed work with a factory created by Castle Windsor.
Here's my original test code, which you can drop into Program.cs of a VS2010 console application, add a reference to Castle.Core and Castle.Windsor, and run. I used Castle.Windsor 2.5.4.
using System;
using Castle.Facilities.TypedFactory;
using Castle.MicroKernel.Registration;
using Castle.Windsor;
namespace StackOverflow9198461
{
public static class ServiceFactoryExtensions
{
public static object Create(this IServiceFactory factory, Type serviceType)
{
return typeof(IServiceFactory).GetMethod("Create")
.MakeGenericMethod(serviceType)
.Invoke(factory, new object[] { });
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.AddFacility<TypedFactoryFacility>();
container.Register(Component
.For<IServiceFactory>()
.AsFactory());
container.Register(Component
.For<IMyService>()
.ImplementedBy<MyService>()
.LifeStyle.Singleton);
var factory = container.Resolve<IServiceFactory>();
var s1 = factory.Create<IMyService>();
var s2 = factory.Create(typeof(IMyService));
Console.WriteLine(s1.GetType().FullName);
Console.WriteLine(s2.GetType().FullName);
if (s1 == s2) Console.WriteLine("Success");
}
}
public interface IServiceFactory
{
//Original Create method that works
T Create<T>();
////The overload that I need that throws an exception
//object Create(Type service)
void Release(object service);
}
public class MyService : IMyService
{
}
public interface IMyService
{
}
}
I am writing integration tests to test existing Routes. The recommended way of getting the response looks something like this (via Camel In Action section 6.4.1):
public class TestGetClaim extends CamelTestSupport {
#Produce(uri = "seda:getClaimListStart")
protected ProducerTemplate producer;
#Test
public void testNormalClient() {
NotifyBuilder notify = new NotifyBuilder(context).whenDone(1).create();
producer.sendBody(new ClientRequestBean("TESTCLIENT", "Y", "A"));
boolean matches = notify.matches(5, TimeUnit.SECONDS);
assertTrue(matches);
BrowsableEndpoint be = context.getEndpoint("seda:getClaimListResponse", BrowsableEndpoint.class);
List<Exchange> list = be.getExchanges();
assertEquals(1, list.size());
System.out.println("***RESPONSE is type "+list.get(0).getIn().getBody().getClass().getName());
}
}
The test runs but I get nothing back. The assertTrue(matches) fails after the 5 second timeout.
If I rewrite the test to look like this I get a response:
#Test
public void testNormalClient() {
producer.sendBody(new ClientRequestBean("TESTCLIENT", "Y", "A"));
Object resp = context.createConsumerTemplate().receiveBody("seda:getClaimListResponse");
System.out.println("***RESPONSE is type "+resp.getClass().getName());
}
The documentation is a little light around this so can anyone tell me what I am doing wrong with the first approach? Is there anything wrong with following the second approach instead?
Thanks.
UPDATE
I have broken this down and it looks like the problem is with the mix of seda as the start endpoint in combination with the use of a recipientList in the Route. I've also changed the construction of the NotifyBuilder (I had the wrong endpoint specified).
If I change the start endpoint to
direct instead of seda then the test will work; or
If I comment out the recipientList
then the test will work.
Here's a stripped down version of my Route that reproduces this issue:
public class TestRouteBuilder extends RouteBuilder {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
// from("direct:start") //works
from("seda:start") //doesn't work
.recipientList(simple("exec:GetClaimList.bat?useStderrOnEmptyStdout=true&args=${body.client}"))
.to("seda:finish");
}
}
Note that if I change the source code of the NotifyTest from the "Camel In Action" source to have a route builder like this then it also fails.
Try to use "seda:getClaimListResponse" in the getEndpoint to be sure the endpoint uri is 100% correct
FWIW: It appears that notifyBuilder in conjunction with seda queues are not quite working: a test class to illustrate:
public class NotifyBuilderTest extends CamelTestSupport {
// Try these out!
// String inputURI = "seda:foo"; // Fails
// String inputURI = "direct:foo"; // Passes
#Test
public void testNotifyBuilder() {
NotifyBuilder b = new NotifyBuilder(context).from(inputURI)
.whenExactlyCompleted(1).create();
assertFalse( b.matches() );
template.sendBody(inputURI, "Test");
assertTrue( b.matches() );
b.reset();
assertFalse( b.matches() );
template.sendBody(inputURI, "Test2");
assertTrue( b.matches() );
}
#Override
protected RouteBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception {
return new RouteBuilder() {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from(inputURI).to("mock:foo");
}
};
}
}
Castle Windsor 2.5. This fails. Why? Is it designated beahvior or a bug? Seems sub dependency resolvers are not even queried when resolving top-level services.
class Program
{
class Resolver :ISubDependencyResolver
{
public object Resolve(CreationContext context, ISubDependencyResolver contextHandlerResolver, ComponentModel model, DependencyModel dependency)
{
return new Program();
}
public bool CanResolve(CreationContext context, ISubDependencyResolver contextHandlerResolver, ComponentModel model, DependencyModel dependency)
{
return dependency.TargetType == typeof (Program);
}
}
[STAThread]
static void Main()
{
var container = new WindsorContainer();
container.Kernel.Resolver.AddSubResolver(new Resolver());
var xxx = container.Resolve<Program>();
}
}
These are sub dependency resolvers. They resolve dependencies, not root services. What are you really trying to do? Why not register the object upfront?