Anyone has an idea why my documentation doesn't recognize the parameters outside of the method? Usually I should be able to place the JavaDoc above a method but still reference the params, right?
Related
I created a new custom Block and wanted to inject an IOptionsSnapshot to read my appsettings.json values. The problem is that I get an error saying there is no parameterless constructor for my custom block.
Is there a way to somehow do this injection or is this a limitation in Piranha and custom blocks.
At the moment neither Fields nor Blocks supports parameter injection into the constructor, however Fields have two initialization methods that both support parameter injection, Init() and InitManager(). Given how models are constructed the easiest solution would probably be to add the corresponding init methods to Blocks as well.
Feel free to open an issue/feature request at the GitHub repo and we can take the discussion from there!
I am using MethodCall.setsField() to try to set an instance field on another instance.
My generated class that is doing the field-setting, GC, is trying to set the value of an instance field in an instance of something it has created (CI). So the field's declaring type is CI; my field-setting code resides in GC (which is in the same package as CI but otherwise unrelated to it).
The ByteBuddy checks seem to indicate that although GC and CI are in the same package, GC must be assignable to CI in order to set this field! That greatly surprised me, but I am not a bytecode expert, and I might very well be overlooking something obvious. Could someone kindly explain why this check is necessary?
The method call sets the field implicitly on the this instance on which the method is invoked. For this to be possible, a non-static field must be declared by a super type of the type on which the method is invoked.
If you think this is too strict, please file an issue with an example of the code you are trying to generate, including the code to generate it which is currently failing. Maybe I am not thinking straight about this and if there's a restriction to be lifted, I would surely do it.
I want to know clearly why and when we use seam injection and outjection? I find and research all day but i can't clearly see it.Please help me.I will appreciate all of your supports.We can import bean and call it properties and methods.That's right?what's the difference?
They means injection like that
#In
Specifies that a component attribute is to be injected from a context variable at the beginning of each component invocation. If the context variable is null, an exception will be thrown.
Make sure you understand Depedency Injection as a concept first. Then get a copy of Seam in Action. Your chapter of choice is chapter 6.
I'm sorry the question really is far too general to give a conclusion about the concepts.
What is a "suitable guard" and what does it look like?
Linked this question because it refers to the same compiler message and the answer mentions a guard but not how to create one. Looked through the AspectJ docs but did not find and answer there.
This Lint warning is usually switched off in AJDT (AspectJ Development Tools) within Eclipse, but you can activate it as a warning or even error like this (I had to do it to actually see it at all when trying to reproduce your issue):
You can just ignore the Lint warning because basically it only says that there is no way for certain pointcuts to populate the thisJoinPoint object lazily during runtime because the pointcut has no dynamic component like if(), cflow() or similar, which is actually good news because it means that all your joinpoints can be determined statically during compile/weave time and are thus faster than dynamic pointcuts. On the other hand, the warning says that the tjp object always has to be created because for some reason it is also always needed during runtime and thus cannot be instantiated lazily.
In PHPUnit, I want to use methods like verifyText() with an optional message as the last parameter, like I do with assertStringEquals($expected, $actual, $message). It doesn't seem to work. Am I missing something?
I would tell myself to read the code, but I tried and I can't even figure out how any of the verify() methods get called. It must be some __call() function but I don't see it. So that's my follow-up question, how do the verify() methods get called? Then I could override them if I want.
I'm exploring the same question, albeit in the context of Selenium.
I found, grepping the source, an array $autoGeneratedCommands, which is set up in SeleniumTestCase/Driver. The mechanism here implements/maps verifyTextPresent() by a call to verifyCommand(), which calls assertCommand(). Subsequently one of the family assert*() is called... omitting the message in the call. This seems like an inadvertant feature to me. Well, coded bug.