I'm using this method:
public Uni<List<QdCF>> findByDataBaixaNull(Pageable pageable) { //... }
I'm using it from my service:
public Uni<List<QdCF>> getQdCFs(Pageable pageable) {
return this.qdcfRepository.findByDataBaixaNull(pageable);
}
I need to map inner QdCF to QdCFPresenter.
I don't quite figure out how to apply map method to inner Page<QdCF>
Related
I am trying to clean and refactor my service code which currently looks like this-
public void generateBalance(Receipt receipt) {
if (receipt.getType().equals(X) && receipt.getRegion.equals(EMEA)) {
// do something to the receipt that's passed
} else if (receiptType.equals(Y)) {
// do something to the receipt
} else if (receipt.getRegion.equals(APAC) {
// call an external API and update the receipt
}....
...
// finally
dataStore.save(receipt);
Basically there's a bunch of conditionals that are in this main service which look for certain fields in the object that is being passed. Either it's the type or the region.
I was looking to use this design pattern- https://www.refactoring.com/catalog/replaceConditionalWithPolymorphism.html
However, I am not sure how this would work for a service class. Currently my REST handler calls this particular service. Also how can I do polymorphism for both the "receiptType" and "region"?
Is there a way I can just do all the updates to the receipt once in different services, then finally save the receipt at one location? (maybe a base class?) I am really confused on how to start. TIA!
If your classes should have the same behaviour, then it becomes pretty simple to use polymorpism. The pattern is called as Strategy. Let me show an example.
At first we need to use enum. If you do not have enum, then you can create a method which will return enum value based on your conditions:
if (receipt.getType().equals(X) && receipt.getRegion.equals(EMEA)) // other
// code is omitted for the brevity
So enum will look like this:
public enum ReceiptType
{
Emea, Y, Apac
}
Then we need an abstract class which will describe behaviour for derived classes:
public abstract class ActionReceipt
{
public abstract string Do();
}
And our derived classes will look this:
public class ActionReceiptEmea : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Emea";
}
}
public class ActionReceiptY : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Y";
}
}
public class ActionReceiptApac : ActionReceipt
{
public override string Do()
{
return "I am Apac";
}
}
Moreover, we need a factory which will create derived classes based on enum. So we can use Factory pattern with a slight modification:
public class ActionReceiptFactory
{
private Dictionary<ReceiptType, ActionReceipt> _actionReceiptByType =
new Dictionary<ReceiptType, ActionReceipt>
{
{
ReceiptType.Apac, new ActionReceiptApac()
},
{
ReceiptType.Emea, new ActionReceiptEmea()
},
{
ReceiptType.Y, new ActionReceiptY()
}
};
public ActionReceipt GetInstanceByReceiptType(ReceiptType receiptType) =>
_actionReceiptByType[receiptType];
}
And then polymorpism in action will look like this:
void DoSomething(ReceiptType receiptType)
{
ActionReceiptFactory actionReceiptFactory = new ActionReceiptFactory();
ActionReceipt receipt =
actionReceiptFactory.GetInstanceByReceiptType(receiptType);
string someDoing = receipt.Do(); // Output: "I am Emea"
}
UPDATE:
You can create some helper method which will return enum value based on
your logic of region and receiptType:
public class ReceiptTypeHelper
{
public ReceiptType Get(ActionReceipt actionReceipt)
{
if (actionReceipt.GetType().Equals("Emea"))
return ReceiptType.Emea;
else if (actionReceipt.GetType().Equals("Y"))
return ReceiptType.Y;
return ReceiptType.Apac;
}
}
and you can call it like this:
void DoSomething()
{
ReceiptTypeHelper receiptTypeHelper = new ReceiptTypeHelper();
ReceiptType receiptType = receiptTypeHelper
.Get(new ActionReceiptEmea());
ActionReceiptFactory actionReceiptFactory = new
ActionReceiptFactory();
ActionReceipt receipt =
actionReceiptFactory.GetInstanceByReceiptType(receiptType);
string someDoing = receipt.Do(); // Output: "I am Emea"
}
My REST controller method should return Mono which must be built of 2 parallel requests to another web services and processing their response where one request return Mono and another request return Flux
How to combine responses of Mono with Flux and process them?
Model:
#Document
#Data
#AllArgsConstructor
#NoArgsConstructor
public class ClassModel {
#Id
private String id;
private String roomNr;
private String className;
private String teacherId;
private List<String> studentIds;
public void addStudentId(String studentId) {
studentIds.add(studentId);
}
}
Controller:
public Mono<ClassModel> addRandomClassFull() {
return Mono.zip(
//request teacher microservice and return Mono - single teacher
reactiveNetClient.addRandomTeacher(),
//request students microservice and return Flux - list of students
reactiveNetClient.addRandomStudents(10),
(teacher, students) -> {
ClassModel classModel = new ClassModel();
classModel.setRoomNr("24B");
classModel.setClassName(faker.educator().course());
classModel.setTeacherId(teacher.getId());
students.forEach(student -> classModel.addStudentId(student.getId());
return classModel;
}).flatMap(classRepository::save);
}
Obviously, the controller is wrong as:
1) Mono.zip() takes 2 or more Mono's, where I have Mono and Flux - How to combine them?
2) Also not sure if:students.forEach(student -> classModel.addStudentId(student.getId());is right aproach?
Any suggestions, please?
You can change your method addRandomStudents() to return Mono<List<Student>>
You can use collectList() on Flux<Student>, it will return then Mono<List<Student>> and then in addStudents() will convert Student object to id.
public Mono<ClassModel> addRandomClassFull() {
return Mono.zip(
reactiveNetClient.addRandomTeacher(),
reactiveNetClient.addRandomStudents(10).collectList(),
(teacher, students) -> {
ClassModel classModel = new ClassModel();
classModel.setRoomNr("24B");
classModel.setClassName(faker.educator().course());
classModel.setTeacherId(teacher.getId());
classModel.addStudents(students);
return classModel;
}).flatMap(classRepository::save);
}
I am using the BLOC pattern for my latest Flutter app and I started out using something like this for my output streams:
class MyBloc {
// Outputs
final Stream<List<Todo>> todos;
factory MyBloc(TodosInteractor interactor) {
final todosController = BehaviorSubject<List<Todo>>()
..addStream(interactor.todos);
return MyBloc._(todosController);
}
MyBloc._(this.todos);
}
but slowly I found myself doing something more like this, using a method (or getter) after awhile:
class MyBloc {
final TodosInteractor _interactor;
// Outputs
Stream<List<Todo>> todos(){
return _interactor.todos;
}
MyBloc(this._interactor) { }
}
For people who want to see... getter for todos in TodosInteractor:
Stream<List<Todo>> get todos {
return repository
.todos()
.map((entities) => entities.map(Todo.fromEntity).toList());
}
When I look at the differing code, I see that the first example uses a field versus a method to expose the stream but I couldn't figure out why I would choose one over the other. It seems to me that creating another controller just to push through the stream is a little much... Is there a benefit to this other than being immutable in my todos stream definition? Or am I just splitting hairs?
Well maybe this will not be a best answer but it is a good practice expose your output stream using get methods. Below a example of a bloc class that i have written to a project using RxDart.
class CityListWidgetBloc {
final _cityInput = PublishSubject<List<Cidade>>();
final _searchInput = new PublishSubject<String>();
final _selectedItemsInput = new PublishSubject<List<Cidade>>();
// exposing stream using get methods
Observable<List<Cidade>> get allCities => _cityInput.stream;
Observable<List<Cidade>> get selectedItems => _selectedItemsInput.stream;
List<Cidade> _searchList = new List();
List<Cidade> _selectedItems = new List();
List<Cidade> _mainDataList;
CityListWidgetBloc() {
//init search stream
_searchInput.stream.listen((searchPattern) {
if (searchPattern.isEmpty) {
_onData(_mainDataList); // resend local data list
} else {
_searchList.clear();
_mainDataList.forEach((city) {
if (city.nome.toLowerCase().contains(searchPattern.toLowerCase())) {
_searchList.add(city);
}
});
_cityInput.sink.add(_searchList);
}
});
}
//getting data from firebase
getCity( {#required String key}) {
FirebaseStateCityHelper.getCitiesFrom(key, _onData);
//_lastKey = key;
}
searchFor(String pattern) {
_searchInput.sink.add(pattern);
}
void _onData(List<Cidade> list) {
_mainDataList = list;
list.sort((a, b) => (a.nome.compareTo(b.nome)));
_cityInput.sink.add(list);
}
bool isSelected(Cidade item) {
return _selectedItems.contains(item);
}
void selectItem(Cidade item) {
_selectedItems.add(item);
_selectedItemsInput.sink.add(_selectedItems);
}
void selectItems(List<Cidade> items){
_selectedItems.addAll( items);
_selectedItemsInput.sink.add( _selectedItems );
}
void removeItem(Cidade item) {
_selectedItems.remove(item);
_selectedItemsInput.sink.add(_selectedItems);
}
dispose() {
_cityInput.close();
_searchInput.close();
_selectedItemsInput.close();
}
}
I am working in Scout and need SmartField. For this I need to set up lookup for suggestions.
I see the example with creating Lookup Call and than implement in Lookup Service getConfiguredSqlSelect
but I use Hibernate to work with classes, so my question is how to connect Smart field with Hibernate object filled service?
create a new lookup call according to [1] with the following differences:
don't select AbstractSqlLookupService as a lookup servic super type, but AbstractLookupService
in the associated lookup service you now need to implement getDataByAll, getDataByKey, and getDataByText
to illustrate the following snippet should help:
public class TeamLookupService extends AbstractLookupService<String> implements ITeamLookupService {
private List<ILookupRow<String>> m_values = new ArrayList<>();
public TeamLookupService() {
m_values.add(new LookupRow<String>("CRC", "Costa Rica"));
m_values.add(new LookupRow<String>("HON", "Honduras"));
m_values.add(new LookupRow<String>("MEX", "Mexico"));
m_values.add(new LookupRow<String>("USA", "USA"));
}
#Override
public List<? extends ILookupRow<String>> getDataByAll(ILookupCall<String> call) throws ProcessingException {
return m_values;
}
#Override
public List<? extends ILookupRow<String>> getDataByKey(ILookupCall<String> call) throws ProcessingException {
List<ILookupRow<String>> result = new ArrayList<>();
for (ILookupRow<String> row : m_values) {
if (row.getKey().equals(call.getKey())) {
result.add(row);
}
}
return result;
}
...
[1] https://wiki.eclipse.org/Scout/Tutorial/4.0/Minicrm/Lookup_Calls_and_Lookup_Services#Create_Company_Lookup_Call
I found this question difficult to express (particularly in title form), so please bear with me.
I have an application that I am continually modifying to do different things. It seems like MEF might be a good way to manage the different pieces of functionality. Broadly speaking, there are three sections of the application that form a pipeline of sorts:
Acquisition
Transformation
Expression
In it's simplest form, I can express each of these stages as an interface (IAcquisition etc). The problems start when I want to use acquisition components that provides richer data than standard. I want to design modules that use this richer data, but I can't rely on it being there.
I could, of course, add all of the data to the interface specification. I could deal with poorer data sources by throwing an exception or returning a null value. This seems a long way from ideal.
I'd prefer to do the MEF binding in three stages, such that modules are offered to the user only if they are compatible with those selected previously.
So my question: Can I specify metadata which restricts the set of available imports?
An example:
Acquision1 offers BasicData only
Acquision2 offers BasicData and AdvancedData
Transformation1 requires BasicData
Transformation2 requires BasicData and AdvancedData
Acquisition module is selected first.
If Acquisition1 is selected, don't offer Transformation 2, otherwise offer both.
Is this possible? If so, how?
Your question suggests a structure like this:
public class BasicData
{
public string Basic { get; set; } // example data
}
public class AdvancedData : BasicData
{
public string Advanced { get; set; } // example data
}
Now you have your acquisition, transformation and expression components. You want to be able to deal with different kinds of data, so they're generic:
public interface IAcquisition<out TDataKind>
{
TDataKind Acquire();
}
public interface ITransformation<TDataKind>
{
TDataKind Transform(TDataKind data);
}
public interface IExpression<in TDataKind>
{
void Express(TDataKind data);
}
And now you want to build a pipeline out of them that looks like this:
IExpression.Express(ITransformation.Transform(IAcquisition.Acquire));
So let's start building a pipeline builder:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.ComponentModel.Composition;
using System.ComponentModel.Composition.Hosting;
using System.ComponentModel.Composition.Primitives;
using System.Linq;
using System.Linq.Expressions;
// namespace ...
public static class PipelineBuidler
{
private static readonly string AcquisitionIdentity =
AttributedModelServices.GetTypeIdentity(typeof(IAcquisition<>));
private static readonly string TransformationIdentity =
AttributedModelServices.GetTypeIdentity(typeof(ITransformation<>));
private static readonly string ExpressionIdentity =
AttributedModelServices.GetTypeIdentity(typeof(IExpression<>));
public static Action BuildPipeline(ComposablePartCatalog catalog,
Func<IEnumerable<string>, int> acquisitionSelector,
Func<IEnumerable<string>, int> transformationSelector,
Func<IEnumerable<string>, int> expressionSelector)
{
var container = new CompositionContainer(catalog);
The class holds MEF type identities for your three contract interfaces. We'll need those later to identify the correct exports. Our BuildPipeline method returns an Action. That is going to be the pipeline, so we can just do pipeline(). It takes a ComposablePartCatalog and three Funcs (to select an export). That way, we can keep all the dirty work inside this class. Then we start by creating a CompositionContainer.
Now we have to build ImportDefinitions, first for the acquisition component:
var aImportDef = new ImportDefinition(def => (def.ContractName == AcquisitionIdentity), null, ImportCardinality.ZeroOrMore, true, false);
This ImportDefinition simply filters out all exports of the IAcquisition<> interface. Now we can give it to the container:
var aExports = container.GetExports(aImportDef).ToArray();
aExports now holds all IAcquisition<> exports in the catalog. So let's run the selector on this:
var selectedAExport = aExports[acquisitionSelector(aExports.Select(export => export.Metadata["Name"] as string))];
And there we have our acquisition component:
var acquisition = selectedAExport.Value;
var acquisitionDataKind = (Type)selectedAExport.Metadata["DataKind"];
Now we're going to do the same for the transformation and the expression components, but with one slight difference: The ImportDefinition is going to ensure that each component can handle the output of the previous component.
var tImportDef = new ImportDefinition(def => (def.ContractName == TransformationIdentity) && ((Type)def.Metadata["DataKind"]).IsAssignableFrom(acquisitionDataKind),
null, ImportCardinality.ZeroOrMore, true, false);
var tExports = container.GetExports(tImportDef).ToArray();
var selectedTExport = tExports[transformationSelector(tExports.Select(export => export.Metadata["Name"] as string))];
var transformation = selectedTExport.Value;
var transformationDataKind = (Type)selectedTExport.Metadata["DataKind"];
var eImportDef = new ImportDefinition(def => (def.ContractName == ExpressionIdentity) && ((Type)def.Metadata["DataKind"]).IsAssignableFrom(transformationDataKind),
null, ImportCardinality.ZeroOrMore, true, false);
var eExports = container.GetExports(eImportDef).ToArray();
var selectedEExport = eExports[expressionSelector(eExports.Select(export => export.Metadata["Name"] as string))];
var expression = selectedEExport.Value;
var expressionDataKind = (Type)selectedEExport.Metadata["DataKind"];
And now we can wire it all up in an expression tree:
var acquired = Expression.Call(Expression.Constant(acquisition), typeof(IAcquisition<>).MakeGenericType(acquisitionDataKind).GetMethod("Acquire"));
var transformed = Expression.Call(Expression.Constant(transformation), typeof(ITransformation<>).MakeGenericType(transformationDataKind).GetMethod("Transform"), acquired);
var expressed = Expression.Call(Expression.Constant(expression), typeof(IExpression<>).MakeGenericType(expressionDataKind).GetMethod("Express"), transformed);
return Expression.Lambda<Action>(expressed).Compile();
}
}
And that's it! A simple example application would look like this:
[Export(typeof(IAcquisition<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(BasicData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Basic acquisition")]
public class Acquisition1 : IAcquisition<BasicData>
{
public BasicData Acquire()
{
return new BasicData { Basic = "Acquisition1" };
}
}
[Export(typeof(IAcquisition<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(AdvancedData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Advanced acquisition")]
public class Acquisition2 : IAcquisition<AdvancedData>
{
public AdvancedData Acquire()
{
return new AdvancedData { Advanced = "Acquisition2A", Basic = "Acquisition2B" };
}
}
[Export(typeof(ITransformation<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(BasicData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Basic transformation")]
public class Transformation1 : ITransformation<BasicData>
{
public BasicData Transform(BasicData data)
{
data.Basic += " - Transformed1";
return data;
}
}
[Export(typeof(ITransformation<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(AdvancedData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Advanced transformation")]
public class Transformation2 : ITransformation<AdvancedData>
{
public AdvancedData Transform(AdvancedData data)
{
data.Basic += " - Transformed2";
data.Advanced += " - Transformed2";
return data;
}
}
[Export(typeof(IExpression<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(BasicData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Basic expression")]
public class Expression1 : IExpression<BasicData>
{
public void Express(BasicData data)
{
Console.WriteLine("Expression1: {0}", data.Basic);
}
}
[Export(typeof(IExpression<>))]
[ExportMetadata("DataKind", typeof(AdvancedData))]
[ExportMetadata("Name", "Advanced expression")]
public class Expression2 : IExpression<AdvancedData>
{
public void Express(AdvancedData data)
{
Console.WriteLine("Expression2: ({0}) - ({1})", data.Basic, data.Advanced);
}
}
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var pipeline = PipelineBuidler.BuildPipeline(new AssemblyCatalog(typeof(Program).Assembly), StringSelector, StringSelector, StringSelector);
pipeline();
}
static int StringSelector(IEnumerable<string> strings)
{
int i = 0;
foreach (var item in strings)
Console.WriteLine("[{0}] {1}", i++, item);
return int.Parse(Console.ReadLine());
}
}