Context: I am trying to write an extension to vscode that will connect to a language server that is already running. The reason I want to do this is so I can run the language server in my IDE, and attach a debugger to it.
I am trying to connect using websockets. This is the code I have in my extension:
import * as vscode from 'vscode';
import WebSocket from 'ws';
import { TextDecoder } from 'util';
// Import the language client, language client options and server options from VSCode language client.
import { LanguageClient } from 'vscode-languageclient';
// Name of the launcher class which contains the main.
const main: string = 'com.ajanuary.ashlang.lsp.AsLangLanguageServerLauncher';
export function activate(context: vscode.ExtensionContext) {
console.log('Congratulations, your extension "ashlang" is now active!');
const ws = new WebSocket(`ws://localhost:5000/`);
const connection = WebSocket.createWebSocketStream(ws);
connection.on("data", function (chunk) {
console.log(new TextDecoder().decode(chunk));
});
let disposable = new LanguageClient('ashLS', 'Ash Language Server',
() => Promise.resolve({
reader: connection,
writer: connection,
}), {
documentSelector: [{ scheme: 'file', language: 'ash' }]
}).start();
context.subscriptions.push(disposable);
}
// this method is called when your extension is deactivated
export function deactivate() {
console.log('Your extension "ashlang" is now deactivated!');
}
The data handler prints out:
{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":0,"result":{"capabilities":{"textDocumentSync":1,"completionProvider":{}}}}
So I know it is able to talk to my server and read the response. However, the extension doesn't seem to handle the response because it never sends any more messages.
How do I get it to read and process the messages from the websocket correctly? Or is there a better way of tackling the problem of developing the languageserver in an IDE?
The problem was the Content-Length header wasn't being sent. I assumed the lsp library I was using would take care of that, but it wasn't.
The message should have been:
Content-Length: 97
{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":0,"result":{"capabilities":{"textDocumentSync":1,"completionProvider":{}}}}
Related
I'm trying to figure out how to mock calls to the auth0 authentication backend when testing a next js app with React Testing Library. I'm using auth0/nextjs-auth0 to handle authentication. My intention is to use MSW to provide mocks for all API calls.
I followed this example in the nextjs docs next.js/examples/with-msw to set up mocks for both client and server API calls. All API calls generated by the auth0/nextjs-auth0 package ( /api/auth/login , /api/auth/callback , /api/auth/logout and /api/auth/me) received mock responses.
A mock response for /api/auth/me is shown below
import { rest } from 'msw';
export const handlers = [
// /api/auth/me
rest.get(/.*\/api\/auth\/me$/, (req, res, ctx) => {
return res(
ctx.status(200),
ctx.json({
user: { name: 'test', email: 'email#domain.com' },
}),
);
}),
];
The example setup works fine when I run the app in my browser. But when I run my test the mocks are not getting picked up.
An example test block looks like this
import React from 'react';
import {render , screen } from '#testing-library/react';
import Home from 'pages/index';
import App from 'pages/_app';
describe('Home', () => {
it('should render the loading screen', async () => {
render(<App Component={Home} />);
const loader = screen.getByTestId('loading-screen');
expect(loader).toBeInTheDocument();
});
});
I render the page inside the App component like this <App Component={Home} /> so that I will have access to the various contexts wrapping the pages.
I have spent about 2 days on this trying out various configurations and I still don't know what I might be doing wrong. Any and every help is appreciated.
This is probably resolved already for the author, but since I ran into the same issue and could not find useful documentation, this is how I solved it for end to end tests:
Overriding/configuring the API host.
The plan is to have the test runner start next.js as custom server and then having it respond to both the next.js, as API routes.
A requirements for this to work is to be able to specify the backend (host) the API is calling (via environment variables). Howerver, access to environment variables in Next.js is limited, I made this work using the publicRuntimeConfig setting in next.config.mjs. Within that file you can use runtime environment variables which then bind to the publicRuntimeConfig section of the configuration object.
/** #type {import('next').NextConfig} */
const nextConfig = {
(...)
publicRuntimeConfig: {
API_BASE_URL: process.env.API_BASE_URL,
API_BASE_PATH: process.env.API_BASE_PATH,
},
(...)
};
export default nextConfig;
Everywhere I reference the API, I use the publicRuntimeConfig to obtain these values, which gives me control over what exactly the (backend) is calling.
Allowing to control the hostname of the API at runtime allows me to change it to the local machines host and then intercept, and respond to the call with a fixture.
Configuring Playwright as the test runner.
My e2e test stack is based on Playwright, which has a playwright.config.ts file:
import type { PlaywrightTestConfig } from '#playwright/test';
const config: PlaywrightTestConfig = {
globalSetup: './playwright.setup.js',
testMatch: /.*\.e2e\.ts/,
};
export default config;
This calls another file playwright.setup.js which configures the actual tests and backend API mocks:
import {createServer} from 'http';
import {parse} from 'url';
import next from 'next';
import EndpointFixture from "./fixtures/endpoint.json";
// Config
const dev = process.env.NODE_ENV !== 'production';
const baseUrl = process?.env?.API_BASE_URL || 'localhost:3000';
// Context
const hostname = String(baseUrl.split(/:(?=\d)/)[0]).replace(/.+:\/\//, '');
const port = baseUrl.split(/:(?=\d)/)[1];
const app = next({dev, hostname, port});
const handle = app.getRequestHandler();
// Setup
export default async function playwrightSetup() {
const server = await createServer(async (request, response) => {
// Mock for a specific endpoint, responds with a fixture.
if(request.url.includes(`path/to/api/endpoint/${EndpointFixture[0].slug}`)) {
response.write(JSON.stringify(EndpointFixture[0]));
response.end();
return;
}
// Fallback for pai, notifies about missing mock.
else if(request.url.includes('path/to/api/')) {
console.log('(Backend) mock not implementeded', request.url);
return;
}
// Regular Next.js behaviour.
const parsedUrl = parse(request.url, true);
await handle(request, response, parsedUrl);
});
// Start listening on the configured port.
server.listen(port, (error) => {
console.error(error);
});
// Inject the hostname and port into the applications publicRuntimeConfig.
process.env.API_BASE_URL = `http://${hostname}:${port}`;
await app.prepare();
}
Using this kind of setup, the test runner should start a server which responds to both the routes defined by/in Next.js as well as the routes intentionally mocked (for the backend) allowing you to specify a fixture to respond with.
Final notes
Using the publicRuntimeConfig in combination with a custom Next.js servers allows you to have a relatively large amount of control about the calls that are being made on de backend, however, it does not necessarily intercept calls from the frontend, the existing frontend mocks might stil be necessary.
I am new to electron.js - been reading the documentation and some similar post here:
How do I make a database call from an Electron front end?
Secure Database Connection in ElectronJS Production App?
Electron require() is not defined
How to use preload.js properly in Electron
But it's still not super clear how to properly implement a secure SQL integration. Basically, I want to create a desktop database client. The app will connect to the remote db and users can run all kind of predefined queries and the results will show up in the app.
The documentation says that if you are working with a remote connection you shouldn't run node in the renderer. Should I then require the SQL module in the main process and use IPC to send data back and forth and preload IPCremote?
Thanks for the help
Short answer: yes
Long answer:
Allowing node on your renderer poses a big security risk for your app. It is best practices in this case to create pass a function to your preloader. There are a few options you can use to do this:
Pass a ipcRenderer.invoke function wrapped in another function to your renderer in your preload. You can then invoke a call to your main process which can either send info back via the same function or via sending it via the window.webContents.send command and listening for it on the window api on your renderer. EG:
Preload.js:
const invoke = (channel, args, cb = () => {return}) => {
ipcRenderer.invoke(channel, args).then((res) => {
cb(res);
});
};
const handle = (channel, cb) => {
ipcRenderer.on(channel, function (Event, message) {
cb(Event, message);
});
};
contextBridge.exposeInMainWorld("GlobalApi", {
invoke: invoke,
handle:handle
});
Renderer:
let users
window.GlobalApi.handle("users", (data)=>{users=data})
window.GlobalApi.invoke("get", "users")
or:
let users;
window.GlobalApi.invoke("get", "users", (data)=>{users=data})
Main:
ipcMain.handle("get", async (path) => {
let data = dbFunctions.get(path)
window.webContents.send(
path,
data
);
}
Create a DB interface in your preload script that passes certain invocations to your renderer that when called will return the value that you need from your db. E.G.
Renderer:
let users = window.myCoolApi.get("users");
Preload.js:
let get = function(path){
let data = dbFuncions.readSomeDatafromDB("path");
return data; // Returning the function itself is a no-no shown below
// return dbFuncions.readSomeDatafromDB("path"); Don't do this
}
contextBridge.exposeInMainWorld("myCoolApi", {
get:get
});
There are more options, but these should generally ensure security as far as my knowledge goes.
I'm trying to setup E2E tests in a NestJS project, however, jest output looks like this:
Jest did not exit one second after the test run has completed
After a lot of reading this is because there are some resources, not yet liberated, after some debugging it turns there's an open connection to redis created by ioredis which is used by bull which is used by NestJS to do task queue processing. The thing is that I don't have a reference to the connection in the test code, so how can I close it? I'm tearing down the Nest application in the afterAll jest's hook like this:
afterAll(async () => {
await app.close();
});
but it does nothing, the connection is still there and the jest error message persists. I know I can just add the --forceExit to the jest command but that is not solving anything, it's just hiding the problem under the rug.
This took me awhile to figure out. You need to close the module in the afterAll hook. I was able to find this from looking at the tests in the nestJS Bull repo.
describe('RedisTest', () => {
let module: TestingModule;
beforeAll(async () => {
module = Test.createTestingModule({
imports: [
BullModule.registerQueueAsync({
name: 'test2',
}),
],
});
});
afterAll(async () => {
await module.close();
});
});
https://github.com/nestjs/bull/blob/master/e2e/module.e2e-spec.ts
After struggling almost to getting depressed i found a solution that worked for me.
I'm using "#nestjs/bull": "^0.3.1", "bull": "^3.21.1".
because the queue from bull package uses redis, it keeps the connection open although the module & app are closed.
await moduleRef.close();
await app.close();
i realized that when using --detectOpenHandles while relying on leaked-handles library for more information, you will see something like this in the console:
tcp stream {
fd: 20,
readable: true,
writable: false,
address: {},
serverAddr: null
}
tcp handle leaked at one of:
at /media/user/somePartitionName/Workspace/Nest/project-
name/node_modules/ioredis/built/connectors/StandaloneConnector.js:58:45
tcp stream {
fd: 22,
readable: true,
writable: true,
address: { address: '127.0.0.1', family: 'IPv4', port: 34876 },
serverAddr: null
}
Solution
using beforEach() & afterEach()
in beforEach(), add this instruction to get an instance of your queue :
queue = moduleRef.get(getQueueToken("queuename"));
in afterEach(), close the queue like so: (also close your app & module for better practice)
await queue.close();
Note
using beforAll() & afterAll() doesn't work and the same problem occurs, at least from what i have tried, both beforEach() & afterEach() work combined.
You don't have to add queue.close() to every test, just close queues in their own service/provider using OnModuleDestroy Hook:
#Injectable()
export class ServicesConsumer implements OnModuleDestroy {
constructor(
#InjectQueue('services')
private readonly servicesQueue: Queue,
) { }
async onModuleDestroy() {
await this.servicesQueue.close();
}
I am making my first steps with websockets in my application.
My frontend is using vue.js while my backend uses flask.
In my component I wrote this.
created() {
console.log('Starting connection to WebSocket Server');
// this.connection = new WebSocket('wss://echo.websocket.org');
this.connection = new WebSocket('wss://192.168.0.22:5000');
this.connection.onmessage = function (event) {
console.log(event);
};
this.connection.onopen = function (event) {
console.log(event);
console.log('Successfully connected to the echo websocket server...');
};
},
In my flask app.py besides other stuff I have this
app = Flask(__name__)
socketio = SocketIO(app)
CORS(app)
"""Socket.IO decorator to create a websocket event handler"""
#socketio.on('my event')
def handle_my_custom_event(json, methods=['GET', 'POST']):
print('received my event: ' + str(json))
socketio.emit('my response', json, callback=messageReceived)
def messageReceived(methods=['GET', 'POST']):
print('message was received!!!')
if __name__ == "__main__":
socketio.run(app, debug=True)
In my browser I get the error that firefox could not make a connection to wss://192.168.0.22:5050. I already tried the frontend with the websocket from a tutorial which is commented out now.
I am not sure, which url I should use for my own backend or what I have to add there.
Sorry if this is obvious but I am a complete beginnern.
Thanks in advance!
EDIT:
In chrome the error I receive is "WebSocket connection to 'wss://192.168.0.38:5000/' failed: WebSocket opening handshake timed out"
Also as I saw this error when trying out stuff, maybe this question could be relevant? vue socket.io connection attempt returning "No 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' header is present" error even when origins have been set
so the part for the socket which i ended up using for the client/component:
import io from 'socket.io-client';
created() {
// test websocket connection
const socket = io.connect('http://192.168.0.38:5000');
// getting data from server
// eslint-disable-next-line
socket.on('connect', function () {
console.error('connected to webSocket');
//sending to server
socket.emit('my event', { data: 'I\'m connected!' });
});
// we have to use the arrow function to bind this in the function
// so that we can access Vue & its methods
socket.on('update_on_layouts', (data) => {
this.getAllLayouts();
console.log(data);
});
},
The Flask server code stayed as shown above. Additionally here is an example from my flask server to emit the update_on_layouts socketio.emit('update_on_layouts', 'success')
I'm trying to build a file upload with Next.js and Ant Design using React.
On localhost, everything works fine. When I deployed the instance and try to upload a file, I get the following error:
Request URL: https://my-app.my-team.now.sh/url/for/test/
Request Method: POST
Status Code: 405
Remote Address: 34.65.228.161:443
Referrer Policy: no-referrer-when-downgrade
The UI that I use looks like the following:
<Dragger {...fileUploadProps}>{renderImageUploadText()}</Dragger>
where fileUploadProps are:
const fileUploadProps = {
name: 'file',
multiple: false,
showUploadList: false,
accept: 'image/png,image/gif,image/jpeg',
onChange(info) {
const { status } = info.file;
if (status === 'done') {
if (info.file.size > 2000000) {
setUploadSizeError('File size is too large');
} else {
handleFieldValue(API_FORM_FIELDS.PICTURE, info);
}
} else if (status === 'error') {
setUploadSizeError(`${info.file.name} file upload failed.`);
}
},
};
I assume, it has to do with the server side rendering of Next.js? On the other hand, it might not, because by the time I navigated to url/for/test it should render on the client.
How do you implemented file uploads with Ant Design and Next.js?
Got this to work by passing the prop action="https://www.mocky.io/v2/5cc8019d300000980a055e76" to the <Upload/> component.
The ANTD Upload component must make a POST request to upload the file. It either makes that POST request to the current url, which results in the 405, or to the url specified by the action prop. https://www.mocky.io/v2/5cc8019d300000980a055e76 works as this url.
Inspired by Trey's answer (and because I didn't want to send data anywhere outside my domain) I made a no-op api route that simply returns a success, and then pointed Ant Design <Upload>'s action to /api/noop
/* pages/api/noop.tsx */
import { NextApiRequest, NextApiResponse } from 'next'
export default async function handler(
req: NextApiRequest,
res: NextApiResponse
) {
res.status(200).end('noop')
}
/* Wherever I'm using <Upload /> */
<Upload
...otherProps
action={'/api/noop'}
>
Note: this is specific to Next.js, which makes it easy to create API routes.
This works for me.
By default, the ANTD upload component makes a POST request to upload the file. So, to avoid this, add a customRequest props on Upload as below.
customRequest={({ onSuccess }) => setTimeout(() => { onSuccess("ok", null); }, 0) }