Using TypeDefinition in ElementMatchers.takesArguments() - byte-buddy

I am creating a class like this:
class A{
A(A a){
...
}
A(){
A(null);
}
}
and my code looks like this:
TypeDefinition selfTypeDefinition = TypeDescription.Generic.Builder.rawType(TargetType.class).build();
Class c = new ByteBuddy().subclass(Object.class,ConstructorStrategy.Default.NO_CONSTRUCTORS).name("A").
defineConstructor(Modifier.PUBLIC).withParameters(selfTypeDefinition)
.intercept(MethodCall.invoke(Object.class.getConstructor())
.andThen(MethodCall.run(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
System.out.println("!!!!init A(A)");
}
})))
.defineConstructor(Modifier.PUBLIC).withParameters(new Type[0])
.intercept(MethodCall.invoke(ElementMatchers.isConstructor()
.and(ElementMatchers.takesArguments(selfTypeDefinition)))
.with(new Object[1])
.andThen(MethodCall.run(new Runnable() {
#Override
public void run() {
System.out.println("!!!!init A()");
}
})))
.make().load(Test.class.getClassLoader()).getLoaded();
The problem is I cannot pass TypeDefinition to ElementMatchers.takesArguments(). I have tried passing selfTypeDefinition.asErasure() but it does not work.

Just use selfTypeDefinition.asErasure() to represent a TypeDescription. Byte Buddy also supports matching generic type descriptions, but the matcher you are using expects an erasure format.

Related

Where do Before and After hooks go in Cucumber

I have a fairly simple Cucumber test framework with a feature file, a step definitions file, and a test runner class that looks like this:
#RunWith(Cucumber.class)
#CucumberOptions(features = "src/test/java/com/tests/cucumber/features/ui/ExampleTest.feature",
glue = { "com.tests.cucumber.stepdefinitions" },
)
public class ExampleTestRunner {
}
This runs a scenario in the feature file just fine. Now I want to add a Before and After hook to do some setup and teardown, but I can't for the like of me get the hooks to run. I've tried adding the hooks to the ExampleTestRunner and to the StepDefinition class, but they never run. Where should I put these hooks? At the moment, the hooks just look like this, but I'll add content to them once I've worked this out!
package com.tests.cucumber.stepdefinitions;
import cucumber.api.java.After;
import cucumber.api.java.Before;
public class StepDefinitions {
#Before
public void before() {
System.out.println("starting before()");
}
}
Thanks for any help.
I am a little hesitant to answer this question even though I managed to get this to work. As far as I can tell, the problem was that I had added the Before and After methods in classes that were extended by other classes. In this situation, the tests would not run. I had to add the Before and After methods to a class that was not extended.
It feels like this is similar to the situation in which if you specify a step definition in a class that is extended by another class, then the step definition is considered to have a duplicate definition. Do I have the correct diagnosis here?
I use like this;
Runner Class:
#RunWith(Cucumber.class)
#CucumberOptions(
features = {"src\\test\\features\\ui_features"},
glue = {"com\\base\\tm\\auto_reg\\tests\\ui_tests\\price_features"},
plugin = {"com.cucumber.listener.ExtentCucumberFormatter:"}
)
public class PriceFeatureRunner {
#BeforeClass
public static void setup() {
RunnerUtil.setup(PriceFeatureRunner.class);
}
#AfterClass
public static void teardown() {
RunnerUtil.teardown();
}
}
RunnerUtil.java:
public class RunnerUtil {
public static void setup(Class<?> clazz) {
String reportPath = "target/cucumber-reports/" + clazz.getSimpleName().split("_")[0] + "_report.html";
ExtentProperties extentProperties = ExtentProperties.INSTANCE;
extentProperties.setReportPath(reportPath);
}
public static void teardown() {
UiHooks uiHooks = new UiHooks();
uiHooks.afterScenario();
ExtentReportConfiguration.configureExtentReportTeardown();
}
}
UiHooks.java
public class UiHooks implements HookHelper {
public static final String BASE_URL = "https://www.stackoverfow.com/";
private Scenario scenario;
#Override
#Before
public void beforeScenario(Scenario scenario) {
this.scenario = scenario;
Reporter.assignAuthor(System.getProperty("user.name"));
}
#Override
#After
public void afterScenario() {
if (HookUtil.driver != null) {
HookUtil.driver.quit();
}
if (HookUtil.seleniumBase != null) {
HookUtil.seleniumBase.stopService();
}
}
#Override
#After
public void afterTest() {
if (HookUtil.driver != null) {
HookUtil.driver.quit();
}
if (HookUtil.seleniumBase != null) {
HookUtil.seleniumBase.stopService();
}
}
}
HookHelper.Java
public interface HookHelper {
#Before
void beforeScenario(Scenario scenario);
#After
void afterScenario();
void afterTest();
}

How to send multiple types of classes into Spring stream source

I upgraded my spring stream from 1.3.0 to 2.1.2 and the default serializer was changed from Kyro (deprecated) into Jackson.
I have a kafka topic that more than one type of messages can be sent to. With Kyro I used to deserialize it into Object.class and then cast it to the relevant type of class.
With jackson I can't achieve this functionality, because I have to specify the type of class I want to deserialize to in advance, otherwise, it's been deserialized into a string.
I tried to find an example but couldn't find anything. Any ideas how can I achieve the same functionality? I want to make it as efficient as possible.
You can add hints to the Jackson encoding so it is decoded to the right concrete type:
#JsonTypeInfo(use=JsonTypeInfo.Id.CLASS, include=JsonTypeInfo.As.PROPERTY, property="#class")
#SpringBootApplication
#EnableBinding(Processor.class)
public class So56753956Application {
public static void main(String[] args) {
SpringApplication.run(So56753956Application.class, args);
}
#StreamListener(Processor.INPUT)
public void listen(Foo foo) {
System.out.println(foo);
}
#Bean
public ApplicationRunner runner(MessageChannel output) {
return args -> {
output.send(new GenericMessage<>(new Bar("fiz")));
output.send(new GenericMessage<>(new Baz("buz")));
};
}
#JsonTypeInfo(use=JsonTypeInfo.Id.CLASS, include=JsonTypeInfo.As.PROPERTY, property="#class")
public static abstract class Foo {
private String bar;
public Foo() {
super();
}
public Foo(String bar) {
this.bar = bar;
}
public String getBar() {
return this.bar;
}
public void setBar(String bar) {
this.bar = bar;
}
#Override
public String toString() {
return getClass().getName() + " [bar=" + this.bar + "]";
}
}
public static class Bar extends Foo {
public Bar() {
super();
}
public Bar(String bar) {
super(bar);
}
}
public static class Baz extends Foo {
public Baz() {
super();
}
public Baz(String bar) {
super(bar);
}
}
}
and
com.example.So56753956Application$Bar [bar=fiz]
com.example.So56753956Application$Baz [bar=buz]
See here.
You can still use Kryo if you want. You can just add it manually using #StreamMessageConverter- https://cloud.spring.io/spring-cloud-stream/spring-cloud-stream.html#spring-cloud-stream-overview-user-defined-message-converters.
With regard to "With jackson I can't achieve this functionality, because I have to specify the type of class. . ." - that is not accurate since the type of the class gets picked up from the signature of the handler method and it is transparent to you as a user.

how to intercept a method with specific parameters with bytebuddy

I want to intercept method named methodA with one arg which's type is String as blow, what should i do. How to use hasParameters() api?
public class Demo {
public static void main(String[] args) {
new ByteBuddy()
.subclass(A.class)
.method(named("methodA").and(hasParameters(?)))
}
static class A {
public void methodA() {
System.out.println("methodA() invoked.");
}
public void methodA(String arg) {
System.out.println("methodA(" + arg + ") invoked.");
}
}
}
For this you want the ElementMatchers.takesArguments(String.class) matcher.
So something like that:
Class<? extends A> loaded = new ByteBuddy().subclass(A.class)
.method(ElementMatchers.named("methodA").and(ElementMatchers.takesArguments(String.class)))
.intercept(MethodDelegation.to(Demo.class))
.make().load(Demo.class.getClassLoader(), ClassLoadingStrategy.Default.INJECTION).getLoaded();
A instance = loaded.getConstructor().newInstance();
instance.methodA("abc");
instance.methodA();
public class Demo {
static void intercept(String arg){
System.out.println("intercepted");
}
}
To clarify, you need to define a matcher (similar to a filter) to apply to methods. Create some constraint in the matcher so it will only match to some parameter structure you specify:
ElementMatcher<Iterable<? extends ParameterDescription>> matcher = parameterDescriptions -> {
for (ParameterDescription p : parameterDescriptions) {
if (p.getType().equals(TypeDescription.STRING.asGenericType()) && p.getIndex() == 0) return true;
}
return false;
};
ByteBuddyAgent.install();
new ByteBuddy()
.redefine(SomeType.class)
.method(ElementMatchers.hasParameters(matcher))
.intercept(FixedValue.value("Hello World"))
.make()
.load(SomeType.class.getClassLoader(),
ClassReloadingStrategy.fromInstalledAgent());

MethodDecorator.Fody and getting parameter values

I was wondering if with MethodDecorator it's possible to have the passed parameter during the OnException... that would be great since if I can catch an exception I can also have the passed parameter values
Consider this piece of code
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Worker worker = new Worker();
worker.DoWork(6);
}
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method | AttributeTargets.Constructor | AttributeTargets.Assembly | AttributeTargets.Module)]
public class LoggableAttribute : Attribute, IMethodDecorator
{
public void OnEntry(System.Reflection.MethodBase method)
{
var args = method.GetParameters();
var arguments = method.GetGenericArguments();
}
public void OnExit(System.Reflection.MethodBase method)
{
}
public void OnException(System.Reflection.MethodBase method, Exception exception)
{
}
}
and
public class Worker
{
[Loggable]
public void DoWork(int i )
{
}
}
I wish to have 6 on the OnEntry/Nor OnException
Thanks
I know this is an old question, but in case someone stumbles upon this like I did, you can add an Init method and capture the argument values there.
e.g:
public class LoggableAttribute : Attribute, IMethodDecorator
{
private object[] arguments;
public void Init(object instance, MethodBase method, object[] args) {
this.arguments = args;
}
public void OnEntry()
{
// this.arguments[0] would be 6 when calling worker.DoWork(6);
}
}
Check out the example on https://github.com/Fody/MethodDecorator

Passing complex navigation parameters with MvvmCross ShowViewModel

My complex type wouldn't pass from Show to Init method even with configured MvxJsonNavigationSerializer as specified here Custom types in Navigation parameters in v3
public class A
{
public string String1 {get;set;}
public string String2 {get;set;}
public B ComplexObject1 {get;set;}
}
public class B
{
public double Double1 {get;set;}
public double Double2 {get;set;}
}
When I pass instance of object A to ShowViewModel method I receive this object with String1 & String2 deserialized correctly but CopmlexObject1 is null.
How to deal with complex object MvvmCross serialization?
I believe there may be some gremlins in that previous answer - will log as an issue :/
There are other possible routes to achieve this type of complex serializable object navigation still using Json and overriding parts of the framework, but actually I think that it might be better to just use your own BaseViewModel's to do serialization and deserialization - e.g. use serialization code like:
public class BaseViewModel
: MvxViewModel
{
private const string ParameterName = "parameter";
protected void ShowViewModel<TViewModel>(object parameter)
where TViewModel : IMvxViewModel
{
var text = Mvx.Resolve<IMvxJsonConverter>().SerializeObject(parameter);
base.ShowViewModel<TViewModel>(new Dictionary<string, string>()
{
{ParameterName, text}
});
}
}
with deserialization like:
public abstract class BaseViewModel<TInit>
: MvxViewModel
{
public void Init(string parameter)
{
var deserialized = Mvx.Resolve<IMvxJsonConverter>().DeserializeObject<TInit>(parameter);
RealInit(deserialized);
}
protected abstract void RealInit(TInit parameter);
}
then a viewModel like this:
public class FirstViewModel
: BaseViewModel
{
public IMvxCommand Go
{
get
{
return new MvxCommand(() =>
{
var parameter = new A()
{
String1 = "Hello",
String2 = "World",
ComplexObject = new B()
{
Double1 = 42.0,
Double2 = -1
}
};
ShowViewModel<SecondViewModel>(parameter);
});
}
}
}
can navigate to something like:
public class SecondViewModel
: BaseViewModel<A>
{
public A A { get; set; }
protected override void RealInit(A parameter)
{
A = parameter;
}
}
A small addition to Stuart's answer to add type safety:
public class BaseViewModel: MvxViewModel {
protected bool ShowViewModel<TViewModel, TInit>(TInit parameter) where TViewModel: BaseViewModel<TInit> {
var text = Mvx.Resolve<IMvxJsonConverter>().SerializeObject(parameter);
return base.ShowViewModel<TViewModel>(new Dictionary<string, string> { {"parameter", text} });
}
}
public abstract class BaseViewModel<TInit> : BaseViewModel {
public void Init(string parameter)
{
var deserialized = Mvx.Resolve<IMvxJsonConverter>().DeserializeObject<TInit>(parameter);
RealInit(deserialized);
}
protected abstract void RealInit(TInit parameter);
}
ShowViewModel method now takes the same parameter type that the RealInit method instead of an object type. Also, BaseViewModel<TInit> inherits from BaseViewModel so their instances can also call the new ShowViewModel method.
The only drawback is that you have to explicitly specify the parameter type in the call like this:
ShowViewModel<StoreInfoViewModel, Store>(store);