I am injecting a model from outside into MPS.
For this purpose, I followed the steps:
create a language that reflects the model I want to inject
create an Intention that gathers the paths to the source models
parse those model files and instantiate the AST in MPS
Testing at different levels requires that I pass wrong paths and create files, to throw and capture exceptions. How can I test such in MPS?
Could we use TempDirTestFixture in test cases inside MPS?
Is there in MPS something like JUnit's TempDirectory?
I tried to use TempDirTestFixtureImpl by adding MPS.IDEA and com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures to my test module, but MPS still complains with the following error:
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/intellij/concurrency/IdeaForkJoinWorkerThreadFactory
1 ERROR JUnitTestExecutor - Exception in the test framework
at com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.impl.BaseFixture.<clinit>(BaseFixture.java:22)
java.lang.NoClassDefFoundError: com/intellij/concurrency/IdeaForkJoinWorkerThreadFactory
at java.base/java.lang.Class.forName0(Native Method)
at com.intellij.testFramework.fixtures.impl.BaseFixture.<clinit>(BaseFixture.java:22)
Related
I am Using soong build system with kotlin and want to opt in for experimental APIs to be used in the code
I have added #file:OptIn(kotlinx.coroutines.ExperimentalCoroutinesApi::class) in kotling file but upon compiling I get error stated as
error: this class can only be used as an annotation or as an argument to #UseExperim
ental
#file:OptIn(kotlinx.coroutines.ExperimentalCoroutinesApi::class)
Can anyone tell me what additional things I need to do to make it work ?
I'm trying to use JavaFX in my android device, with the help of javafxports.
I used the XStream to parse some XML file in my program.
When i compile them, the javafxports outputs the following warnings:
Note: there were 9 classes trying to access annotations using reflection.
You should consider keeping the annotation attributes
(using '-keepattributes *Annotation*').
(http://proguard.sourceforge.net/manual/troubleshooting.html#attributes)
Note: there were 32 classes trying to access generic signatures using reflection.
You should consider keeping the signature attributes
(using '-keepattributes Signature').
(http://proguard.sourceforge.net/manual/troubleshooting.html#attributes)
Note: there were 56 unresolved dynamic references to classes or interfaces.
You should check if you need to specify additional program jars.
(http://proguard.sourceforge.net/manual/troubleshooting.html#dynamicalclass)
Note: there were 3 class casts of dynamically created class instances.
You might consider explicitly keeping the mentioned classes and/or
their implementations (using '-keep').
(http://proguard.sourceforge.net/manual/troubleshooting.html#dynamicalclasscast)
Note: there were 39 accesses to class members by means of introspection.
You should consider explicitly keeping the mentioned class members
(using '-keep' or '-keepclassmembers').
(http://proguard.sourceforge.net/manual/troubleshooting.html#dynamicalclassmember)
Note: you're ignoring all warnings!
The output .apk can be installed and run until it calls the xstream classes to read annotations in my classes. The reason is actually described in the warnings.
So my question is, how can i disable the proguard when generating .apk, or send it a custom proguard.pro configuration.
And my build.gradle is almost the same as that in the helloworld example.
Thanks.
I'm trying to reuse common logic among multiple Gradle tasks, similar to what was suggested in this answer, but I'm having trouble with extra project properties not being visible.
Boiled down, here's the problem. Say I have a root Gradle build script, build.gradle that sets an extra project property,
project.ext.myProp = 'myValue'
I have a subproject defined in settings.gradle,
include 'subproject'
and the subproject defines and uses a custom task that references that extra project property,
class CustomTask extends DefaultTask {
CustomTask() {
doFirst {
println project.ext.myProp
}
}
}
task custom(type: CustomTask) {
println 'custom task'
}
Executing this gives me this:
FAILURE: Build failed with an exception.
...
* Exception is:
org.gradle.api.GradleScriptException: A problem occurred evaluating project ':subproject'.
...
Caused by: org.gradle.api.tasks.TaskInstantiationException: Could not create task of type 'CustomTask'.
...
Caused by: groovy.lang.MissingPropertyException: cannot get property 'myProp' on extra properties extension as it does not exist
...
BUILD FAILED
Note that this seems to work if:
the custom task is defined in the root project alongside the extra property
if you use dynamic properties instead of extra properties, but those are deprecated
The recommended syntax for reading an extra property named foo in a build script is foo or project.foo (rather than ext.foo), which will also search the parent projects' (extra) properties. EDIT: In a task class, you can use project.foo.
It's important to note that extra properties are only meant for ad-hoc scripting in build scripts; task classes and plugins should not use them. A task class shouldn't reach out into the Gradle object model at all; instead, it should declare properties (and, if necessary, methods) which allow build scripts and/or plugins to supply it with all information that it needs. This makes it easier to understand, reuse, and document the task class, and makes it possible to declare inputs and outputs via #Input... and #Output... annotations.
PS: Instead of calling doFirst in a constructor, a task class usually has a method annotated with #TaskAction.
When I execute the following experimental code subset at http://groovyconsole.appspot.com/
class FileHandler {
def rootDir
FileHandler(String batchName) {
rootDir = '.\\Results\\'+batchName+'\\'
}
}
//def fileHandler = new FileHandler('Result-2012-12-15-10-48-55')
An exception results:
java.lang.NoSuchMethodException: FileHandler.<init>()
When I uncomment the last line that instantiates the class, the error goes away.
Can someone explain why this is? I'm basically attempting to segregate the definition and instantiation of the class into 2 files to be evaluated separately. Thanks
I'm not sure of the exact implementation details behind http://groovyconsole.appspot.com/ (source linked to from there points to Gaelyk, which I've not looked over). I'd bet it's looking for a no-arg constructor for the class you've presented, in an effort to find something runnable. (note that if you provide that, it still won't work, as it wants a main() :/)
Running locally in groovyConsole will die a bit sooner, with the following error message:
groovy.lang.GroovyRuntimeException: This script or class could not be run. It should either:
- have a main method,
- be a JUnit test or extend GroovyTestCase,
- implement the Runnable interface,
- or be compatible with a registered script runner.
This is perhaps more descriptive and to the point. If you want to run some Groovy as a simple script, you'll need to supply a jumping-in point. The easiest way is an executable statement in your groovy file, outside of any class definition (e.g, uncommenting your instantiation statement). Alternatively, a class with a main method should do it. (see here).
If 2 files is how you want to break it up, you can save the class file def in one groovy file (e.g., First.groovy) and create a second (e.g., Second.groovy) with just your executable statements. (I believe the first one will be in the classpath automatically when you run groovy Second, if both are in same directory)
I am currently experiencing a problem in my RCP application and wanted to ask, if someone stumbled over the same problem and can give me some valuable hints:
My RCP application allows plugins to provide implementations of a specific abstract class of my model (singleton) to extend my model during runtime via the update manager. I instantiate these classes via
extensionPointImplementation.createExecutableExtension(..)
after parsing the Eclipse registry. I can serialize the created instances using the default Java serialization API.
Now to the problem: The plugin trying to deserialize the objects cannot find the class implementations of the model extensions due to the fact, that there is no plugin dependency between the plugins. Nevertheless, it is not possible for me to create such a dependency which would make the idea of extending the model during runtime obsolete.
Is it possible to solve this problem by using the default Java serialization API or do I have to implement my own serialization (which parses the Eclipse registry and creates the instances via the line shown above if all necessary plugins are available, otherwise throw an exception) which might be based on the default Java serialization API (if possible I do not want to create the serialization completely by myself)?
Thanks.
You need to define a so called buddy policy.
In the bundle trying to instantiate the class add
Eclipse-BuddyPolicy: registered
to the manifest.mf.
In the bundle providing the class add
Eclipse-RegisterBuddy: <symbolic name of the bundle instantiating the class>
to the manifest.mf.