Here my first code:
public Mono<QdCFPresenter> store(QdCFPresenter qdcf) {
return Optional.ofNullable(qdcf)
.map(this.persistencyMapper::toPersistency)
.map(this.qdcfRepository::save)
.flatMap(this.presenterMapper::toPresenter);
}
My qdcf object is:
mapped to persistency model
saved on database
mapped to presenter model
I need to create an audit after qdcfRepository.save method.
I'm trying that:
public Mono<QdCFPresenter> store(QdCFPresenter qdcf) {
return Optional.ofNullable(qdcf)
.map(this.persistencyMapper::toPersistency)
.map(this.qdcfRepository::save)
.orElse(Mono.empty())
.map(this::buildAuditoria)
.map(this.auditoriaService::store)
.flatMap(this.presenterMapper::toPresenter);
}
Nevertheless, last step is telling me:
type QdCFPresenterMapper does not define toPresenter(Mono) that is applicable here
Shortly, is telling me that I'm passing an Auditoria object to method toPresenter(Mono<AuditoriaPresenter>).
Is there any way do that whithout losing initial Mono object?
Related
In ASP.Net Core you have multiple ways to generate an URL for controller action, the newest being tag helpers.
Using tag-helpers for GET-requests asp-route is used to specify route parameters. It is from what I understand not supported to use complex objects in route request. And sometimes a page could have many different links pointing to itself, possible with minor addition to the URL for each link.
To me it seems wrong that any modification to controller action signature requires changing all tag-helpers using that action. I.e. if one adds string query to controller, one must add query to model and add asp-route-query="#Model.Query" 20 different places spread across cshtml-files. Using this approach is setting the code up for future bugs.
Is there a more elegant way of handling this? For example some way of having a Request object? (I.e. request object from controller can be put into Model and fed back into action URL.)
In my other answer I found a way to provide request object through Model.
From the SO article #tseng provided I found a smaller solution. This one does not use a request object in Model, but retains all route parameters unless explicitly overridden. It won't allow you to specify route through an request object, which is most often not what you want anyway. But it solved problem in OP.
<a asp-controller="Test" asp-action="HelloWorld" asp-all-route-data="#Context.GetQueryParameters()" asp-route-somestring="optional override">Link</a>
This requires an extension method to convert query parameters into a dictionary.
public static Dictionary GetQueryParameters(this HttpContext context)
{
return context.Request.Query.ToDictionary(d => d.Key, d => d.Value.ToString());
}
There's a rationale here that I don't think you're getting. GET requests are intentionally simplistic. They are supposed to describe a specific resource. They do no have bodies, because you're not supposed to be passing complex data objects in the first place. That's not how the HTTP protocol is designed.
Additionally, query string params should generally be optional. If some bit of data is required in order to identify the resource, it should be part of the main URI (i.e. the path). As such, neglecting to add something like a query param, should simply result in the full data set being returned instead of some subset defined by the query. Or in the case of something like a search page, it generally will result in a form being presented to the user to collect the query. In other words, you action should account for that param being missing and handle that situation accordingly.
Long and short, no, there is no way "elegant" way to handle this, I suppose, but the reason for that is that there doesn't need to be. If you're designing your routes and actions correctly, it's generally not an issue.
To solve this I'd like to have a request object used as route parameters for anchor TagHelper. This means that all route links are defined in only one location, not throughout solution. Changes made to request object model automatically propagates to URL for <a asp-action>-tags.
The benefit of this is reducing number of places in the code we need to change when changing method signature for a controller action. We localize change to model and action only.
I thought writing a tag-helper for a custom asp-object-route could help. I looked into chaining Taghelpers so mine could run before AnchorTagHelper, but that does not work. Creating instance and nesting them requires me to hardcode all properties of ASP.Net Cores AnchorTagHelper, which may require maintenance in the future. Also considered using a custom method with UrlHelper to build URL, but then TagHelper would not work.
The solution I landed on is to use asp-all-route-data as suggested by #kirk-larkin along with an extension method for serializing to Dictionary. Any asp-all-route-* will override values in asp-all-route-data.
<a asp-controller="Test" asp-action="HelloWorld" asp-all-route-data="#Model.RouteParameters.ToDictionary()" asp-route-somestring="optional override">Link</a>
ASP.Net Core can deserialize complex objects (including lists and child objects).
public IActionResult HelloWorld(HelloWorldRequest request) { }
In the request object (when used) would typically have only a few simple properties. But I thought it would be nice if it supported child objects as well. Serializing object into a Dictionary is usually done using reflection, which can be slow. I figured Newtonsoft.Json would be more optimized than writing simple reflection code myself, and found this implementation ready to go:
public static class ExtensionMethods
{
public static IDictionary ToDictionary(this object metaToken)
{
// From https://geeklearning.io/serialize-an-object-to-an-url-encoded-string-in-csharp/
if (metaToken == null)
{
return null;
}
JToken token = metaToken as JToken;
if (token == null)
{
return ToDictionary(JObject.FromObject(metaToken));
}
if (token.HasValues)
{
var contentData = new Dictionary();
foreach (var child in token.Children().ToList())
{
var childContent = child.ToDictionary();
if (childContent != null)
{
contentData = contentData.Concat(childContent)
.ToDictionary(k => k.Key, v => v.Value);
}
}
return contentData;
}
var jValue = token as JValue;
if (jValue?.Value == null)
{
return null;
}
var value = jValue?.Type == JTokenType.Date ?
jValue?.ToString("o", CultureInfo.InvariantCulture) :
jValue?.ToString(CultureInfo.InvariantCulture);
return new Dictionary { { token.Path, value } };
}
}
I'm trying to implement custom cloning in my solution, i followed the instructions as in the documentation, and i encountered a roadblock in the form of this exception : The entity was never added to this ScoreDirector. Maybe that specific instance is not in the return values of the PlanningSolution's entity members. I know that this is not true because before the custom cloning, this exception wasn't thrown.
My planningClone method is setup like this :
#Override
public Solution planningClone() {
Solution clonedSolution = new Solution();
clonedSolution.id = id;
clonedSolution.code = code;
clonedSolution.score = score;
clonedSolution.field1 = field1;
clonedSolution.field2 = field2;
...............
clonedSolution.fieldN = fieldN;
List<PlanningEntity1> clonedPlanningEntity1List= new ArrayList<PlanningEntity1>(planningEntity1List.size());
List<PlanningEntity2> clonedPlanningEntity2List= new ArrayList<PlanningEntity2>(planningEntity1List.size());
for (PlanningEntity1 planningEntity: planningEntity1List) {
clonedPlanningEntity1List.add(planningEntity.clone());
}
for (PlanningEntity2 planningEntity: planningEntity2List) {
clonedPlanningEntity1List.add(planningEntity.clone());
}
clonedSolution.planningEntity1List = clonedPlanningEntity1List;
clonedSolution.planningEntity2List = clonedPlanningEntity2List;
return clonedSolution;
{
The clone method for my planning entities is implemented through the Java interface Cloneable:
protected PlanningEntity clone() {
try {
return (PlanningEntity) super.clone();
} catch (CloneNotSupportedException e) {
e.printStackTrace();
}
return null;
}
Just to be sure, i checked every entity instance and their collections to make sure my cloning was working correctly, and it in fact is.
What step am i missing here?
If there is one planning entity pointing to another planning entity from a different class or maybe pointing to a list, than the cloning process needs to take care of the references for those planning entities so they point to the cloned objects.This is something that the default cloning process is doing without a problem, and thus leaving the solution in a consistent state. It even updates the Lists of planning entity instances in the parent planning entities correctly (covered by the method "cloneCollectionsElementIfNeeded" from the class "FieldAccessingSolutionCloner" from the OptaPlanner core).
So for example if we have the next two planning entity classes
#PlanningEntity
public class ParentPlanningEntityClass{
List<ChildPlanningEntityClass> childPlanningEntityClassList;
}
#PlanningEntity
public class ChildPlanningEntityClass{
ParentPlanningEntityClass parentPlanningEntityClass;
}
The "parentPlanningEntityClass" variable needs to be set to point to the cloned object. When it comes to the list "childPlanningEntityClassList" it first needs to be created from scratch with "new ArrayList();" so that both the working and new best solution (the one that is currently getting cloned) don't point to the same list. At the end the newly created list needs to be filled with the cloned objects.
I am trying to control when a new view is created and when an existing view is shown.
This is a very similar scenario as outlined in the "Navigating to Existing Views" section in the Prism documentation, but I can't get it to work fully:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg430861(v=pandp.40).aspx
I am finding I can create the view/view model to begin with ok, but I am then unable to create a new instance of it. I.e. I want more than one instance to exist at once.
Here's an example of the view model:
[Export]
[PartCreationPolicy(CreationPolicy.NonShared)]
public class DataEntryPageViewModel : INavigationAware, IRegionMemberLifetime
{
private Guid id;
[ImportingConstructor]
public DataEntryPageViewModel()
{
id = Guid.NewGuid();
}
public bool IsNavigationTarget(NavigationContext navigationContext)
{
// In actual fact there would be more logic here to determine
// whether this should be shown to the user
return false;
}
public void OnNavigatedFrom(NavigationContext navigationContext)
{
}
public void OnNavigatedTo(NavigationContext navigationContext)
{
}
public bool KeepAlive
{
// For the purposes of this example we don't want the view or the viewModel
// to be disposed of.
get { return true; }
}
}
I am navigating to this as follows:
m_RegionManager.RequestNavigate(
"MainRegion",
new Uri("/DataEntryPageView", UriKind.Relative));
So the first time I call the above the view is shown.
The next time I call RequestNavigate the IsNavigationTarget is hit and it returns false. What I then want it to do is to create a new instance but that doesn't happen. I know it's not happening because the constructor does not get hit and the UI does not update to show the new instance of the view.
Any ideas how I can make it create a new instance?
Many thanks,
Paul
Edit
I have noticed that the second time I call RequestNavigate (to request another instance of the same view) the callback reports an error "View already exists in region." It therefore seems that I can have multiple instances of different views in a region, but not multiple instances of the same view. My understand of this isn't great though so I could be wrong.
Why are you not creating the view when you want a new one to be created? It looks to me like you are using MEF.
Use the container to resolve a new instance of your view
Add the new instance of the view to the MainRegion
Then call Navigate and handle the appropriate logic in IsNavigationTarget
You should use the [Export] attribute in your view with a contract name: [Export("DataEntryPageView")].
I have now been able to get this to work, it was because I didn't have
[PartCreationPolicy(CreationPolicy.NonShared)]
on the class declaration of the view. I had it on the ViewModel.
So this is now resulting in the behaviour I expected.
Thanks though to Zabavsky and Alan for your suggestions.
I am trying to save (RavenDB build 960) the names and values of form data items passed into a Nancy Module via its built in Request.Form.
If I save a straightforward instance of a dynamic object (with test properties and values) then everything works and both the property names and values are saved. However, if I use Nancy's Request.Form then only the dynamic property names are saved.
I understand that I will have to deal with further issues to do with restoring the correct types when retrieving the dynamic data (RavenJObjects etc) but for now, I want to solve the problem of saving the dynamic names / values in the first place.
Here is the entire test request and code:
Fiddler Request (PUT)
Nancy Module
Put["/report/{name}/add"] = parameters =>
{
reportService.AddTestDynamic(Db, parameters.name, Request.Form);
return HttpStatusCode.Created;
};
Service
public void AddTestDynamic(IDocumentSession db, string name, dynamic data)
{
var testDynamic = new TestDynamic
{
Name = name,
Data = data
};
db.Store(testDynamic);
db.SaveChanges();
}
TestDynamic Class
public class TestDynamic
{
public string Name;
public dynamic Data;
}
Dynamic contents of Request.Form at runtime
Resulting RavenDB Document
{
"Name": "test",
"Data": [
"username",
"age"
]
}
Note: The type of the Request.Form is Nancy.DynamicDictionary. I think this may be the problem since it inherits from IEnumerable<string> and not the expected IEnumerable<string, object>. I think that RavenDB is enumerating the DynamicDictionary and only getting back the dynamic member-names rather than the member name / value pairs.
Can anybody tell me how or whether I can treat the Request.Form as a dynamic object with respect to saving it to RavenDB? If possible I want to avoid any hand-crafted enumeration of DynamicDictionary to build a dynamic instance so that RavenDB can serialise correctly.
Thank You
Edit 1 #Ayende
The DynamicDictionary appears to implement the GetDynamicMemberNames() method:
Taking a look at the code on GitHub reveals the following implementation:
public override IEnumerable<string> GetDynamicMemberNames()
{
return dictionary.Keys;
}
Is this what you would expect to see here?
Edit 2 #TheCodeJunkie
Thanks for the code update. To test this I have:
Created a local clone of the NancyFx/Nancy master branch from
GitHub
Added the Nancy.csproj to my solution and referenced the project
Run the same test as above
RavenDB Document from new DynamicDictionary
{
"Name": "test",
"Data": {
"$type": "Nancy.DynamicDictionary, Nancy",
"username": {},
"age": {}
}
}
You can see that the resulting document is an improvement. The DynamicDictionary type information is now being correctly picked up by RavenDB and whilst the dynamic property-names are correctly serialized, unfortunately the dynamic property-values are not.
The image below shows the new look DynamicDictionary in action. It all looks fine to me, the new Dictionary interface is clearly visible. The only thing I noticed was that the dynamic 'Results view' (as opposed to the 'Dynamic view') in the debugger, shows just the property-names and not their values. The 'Dynamic view' shows both as before (see image above).
Contents of DynamicDictionary at run time
biofractal,
The problem is the DynamicDictionary, in JSON, types can be either objects or lists ,they can't be both.
And for dynamic object serialization, we rely on the implementation of GetDynamicMemberNames() to get the properties, and I assume that is isn't there.
It's more like theoretical question.
I have one table to hold dictionary items, and the next one for hold Users data.
User table contains a lot reference collumns of type many to one indicated on dictionary item table. It's looks like:
public class User
{
public int Id;
public Dictionary Status;
public Dictionary Type;
public Dictionary OrganizationUnit;
......
}
I want retrieve all dictionary on startup of aplication, and then when i retrieved user and invoke reference property to dictionary the dictionary object should be taken from cache.
I know i can use a 2nd level cache in this scenario, but i'm interested about other solution. Is there any?
It's posible to make my custom type and said that: use my custom cache to retrieved value of dictionary??
Across multiple session the second level cache is the best answer, the only other solutions to populate objects from a cache without using second level cache i can think of would be to use an onLoad interceptor (and simply leave your dictionaries unmapped) or do it manually somewhere in your application.
But why don't you want to use the seocondlevel cache? If your views on caching is very different from the storages there are providers for in hibernate it is possible for you to implement your own provider?
Why not store it in the session? Just pull the record set one time and push it into session and retrieve it each time you want it. I do something similar for other stuff and I believe my method should work for you. In my code I have a session manager that I call directly from any piece of code needs the session values. I choose this method since I can query the results and I can manipulate the storage and retrieval methods. When relying on NHibernate to do the Caching for me, I don't have the granularity of control to cause specific record sets to only be available to specific sessions. I also find that NHibernate is not as efficient as using the session directly. When profiling the CPU and memory usage I find that this method is faster and uses a little less memory. If you want to do it on a site level instead of session, look into HttpContext.Current.Cache.
The following example works perfectly for storing and retrieving record sets:
// Set the session
SessionManager.User = (Some code to pull the user record with relationships. Set the fetch mode to eager for each relationship else you will just have broken references.)
// Get the session
User myUser = SessionManager.User;
public static class SessionManager
{
public static User User
{
get { return GetSession("MySessionUser") as User; }
set { SetSession("MySessionUser", value); }
}
private static object GetSession(string key)
{
// Fix Null reference error
if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current == null || System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session == null)
{
return null;
}
else
{
return System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session[key];
}
}
private static void SetSession(string key, object valueIn)
{
// Fix null reference error
if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session[key] == null)
{
System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session.Add(key, valueIn);
}
else
{
System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Session[key] = valueIn;
}
}
}