I'm upgrading from NHibernate 4 to 5 and I cannot compile my code because of the following error: "EntityMode is not a member of ISessionImplementor"
My code was copied from here: https://nhibernate.info/doc/howto/various/finding-dirty-properties-in-nhibernate.html
Any idea, what happened with EntityMode in ISessionImplementor?
While upgrading to NHibernate 5 I came accross the same issue. It seems that this change removed the EntityMode argument from GetPropertyValues, so yes, the argument version is removed in NHibernate 5. The release notes have the change listed under removed features: https://github.com/nhibernate/nhibernate-core/blob/5.1.6/releasenotes.txt#L654.
From what I can ISessionImplementor.EntityMode anyways only returned EntityMode.Poco and GetPropertyValues only checked if the passed EntityMode is EntityMode.Poco. So it seems save to just remove that argument, no other change needed replacing it. Given that #hazzik was the author of said change give that advice more credibility too.
Related
I want to build a class in Raku. Here's what I have so far:
unit class Vimwiki::File;
has Str:D $.path is required where *.IO.e;
method size {
return $.file.IO.s;
}
I'd like to get rid of the size method by simply making my class inherit the methods from IO::Path but I'm at a bit of a loss for how to accomplish this. Trying is IO::Path throws errors when I try to create a new object:
$vwf = Vimwiki::File.new(path => 't/test_file.md');
Must specify a non-empty string as a path
in block <unit> at t/01-basic.rakutest line 24
Must specify a non-empty string as a path
I always try a person's code when looking at someone's SO. Yours didn't work. (No declaration of $vwf.) That instantly alerts me that someone hasn't applied Minimal Reproducible Example principles.
So I did and less than 60 seconds later:
IO::Path.new
Yields the same error.
Why?
The doc for IO::Path.new shows its signature:
multi method new(Str:D $path, ...
So, IO::Path's new method expects a positional argument that's a Str. You (and my MRE) haven't passed a positional argument that's a Str. Thus the error message.
Of course, you've declared your own attribute $path, and have passed a named argument to set it, and that's unfortunately confused you because of the coincidence with the name path, but that's the fun of programming.
What next, take #1
Having a path attribute that duplicates IO::Path's strikes me as likely to lead to unnecessary complexity and/or bugs. So I think I'd nix that.
If all you're trying to do is wrap an additional check around the filename, then you could just write:
unit class Vimwiki::File is IO::Path;
method new ($path, |) { $path.IO.e ?? (callsame) !! die 'nope' }
callsame redispatches the ongoing routine call (the new method call), with the exact same arguments, to the next best fitting candidate(s) that would have been chosen if your new one containing the callsame hadn't been called. In this case, the next candidate(s) will be the existing new method(s) of IO::Path.
That seems fine to get started. Then you can add other attributes and methods as you see fit...
What next, take #2
...except for the IO::Path bug you filed, which means you can't initialize attributes in the normal way because IO::Path breaks the standard object construction protocol! :(
Liz shows one way to workaround this bug.
In an earlier version of this answer, I had not only showed but recommended another approach, namely delegation via handles instead of ordinary inheritance. I have since concluded that that was over-complicating things, and so removed it from this answer. And then I read your issue!
So I guess the delegation approach might still be appropriate as a workaround for a bug. So if later readers want to see it in action, follow #sdondley's link to their code. But I'm leaving it out of this (hopefully final! famous last words...) version of this answer in the hope that by the time you (later reader) read this, you just need to do something really simple like take #1.
A vendor supplied code using NHibernate... and I'm not familiar at all with NHibernate. At one point in the code, it is calling the Flush() and it is throwing an error because one of the entities has a 1/1/0001 for a date value. I attempted to circumvent by evicting any entities that have that as a value. However, the evict is not working as the EntityKeys is set to Read-Only.
Code:
if (((Event)e.Identifier).EnrollmentDate == DateTime.MinValue)
{
Db.CurrentSession.Evict(e.Identifier);
}
I also attempted:
Db.CurrentSession.Evict(typeof(Event));
Whenever the code executed, it didn't throw any errors, but it didn't evict either. When I tried the RemoveAt, it threw the 'Collection is read-only.' error
Is there a way around that?
You need to fix the problem with the date being set to an invalid value. Attempting to work around the problem is a losing proposition.
This is at least a documentation error, if not a bug.
In VB.NET prior to .NET 4.0 (i.e. VB.NET 7 through 9) an empty Structure declaration fails at compile-time with
error BC30281: Structure 'MySimpleEmpty' must contain at least one instance member variable or Event declaration.
E.g. The following two structures compile successfully in VB10, and not prior:
Structure MySimpleEmpty
End Structure
Public Structure AnotherEmpty
Public Const StillEmpty As Boolean = True
End Structure
I note the documentation for the Error BC30281 stops at VB9, but the documentation for the Structure statement still has the datamemberdeclarations as required even as of VB11 (.NET 4.5 VS2012).
These two Structures compile in VB11 (VS2012) as well. (Thanks John Woo.)
Is there some blog entry or documentation confirming this is an intended change or a bug in VB10 and later?
Microsoft have marked this as a fixed bug, without actually stating what was fixed.
The VB11 (VS2012) documentation now says the datamemberdeclarations are optional in the grammar, but in the Parts table it says "Required. Zero or more..."!
I guess that's a fix... The VB10 (VS2010) documentation hasn't been changed.
I've seen this opportunity reported at least half a dozen times with about as many responses.
My problem is, I've got a MySQL database function defined, we'll call it "my_func(int val) returns int", which works fine if I test directly on the database.
I've also gotten it to work with a direct SQL passthrough my repository implementation, which is okay, but I'd rather route it through Hql, for some god-awful reason...
So... I've got a MySQL5Dialect setup to register the function and I'm having some difficulty parsing through the expected conventions.
My understanding is that I need to prefix the function name with "dbo." at some point during the function registration?
Something like this,
//...
RegisterFunction("my_func", new SQLFunctionTemplate(NHibernateUtil.Int32, "my_func(?1)"));
//...
And then through my repository,
var value = repository.FindByHQL<int>("select my_func(2)").Single();
Where FindByHQL returns an IList.
Any thoughts why this wouldn't work.
I'm running the latest WAMP (2.1e I think).
Enough info? Let me know if I can provide any further details.
Thanks,
Michael
select my_func(2)
is not valid HQL, regardless of whether the function is registered or not.
You can use SQL instead if that's your use case.
Post full exception with stack trace if it's not and this was just a simplified example.
I have a GUI app written in C++/CLI which has a load of configurable options. I have some overloaded functions which grab values from my data source and I'd like to connect my options to those values.
So here's a couple of data retrievers:
bool GetConfigSingle(long paramToGet, String^% str, char* debug, long debugLength);
bool GetConfigSingle(long paramToGet, bool^% v_value, char* debug, long debugLength);
I was hoping to pass in the checkbox's Checked getter/setter as follows:
result = m_dataSource->GetConfigSingle(CONFIG_OPTION1, this->myOption->Checked, debug, debugLen);
...but for some reason I get an odd compiler error which suggests the Checked value isn't being passed as I'd expect:
1>.\DataInterface.cpp(825) : error C2664: 'bool DataInterface::GetConfigSingle(long,System::String ^%, char*, long)' : cannot convert parameter 2 from 'bool' to 'System::String ^%'
Previously this code passed the checkbox in and modified the values itself, but I'm keen to break the dependency our data collection currently has on windows forms.
So what am I missing here?
[Edit] I've filled out the function definitions as they originally were to avoid confusion - my attempt to reduce the irrelevent information failed.
I'm fairly certain that the CheckBox getter / setter returns a bool.
Figured I'd clarify my comments from above and make it a "real" answer...
When you call Checked, what you're getting back as a return value is a bool that represents the current state of the CheckBox. It is not, however, a reference to the actual data member that holds the CheckBox's state. In fact, a properly encapsulated class shouldn't give access to it. Furthermore, since Checked returns a bool by value, that bool is a temporary object that doesn't necessarily exist by the time GetCongigSingle is called.
This leaves you with several options. Either pass the bools by value, and later set the CheckBox's state, or pass the CheckBox itself by reference and "check" it wherever you want.
The two overload of the method GetConfigSingleFile that you have mentioned both take two arguments whereas you are passing 4 arguments to the method. Are there any default arguments? If yes, can you please reproduce the original method declarations?
Most probably, the 4 argument overload of this method is expecting a String^% as the 2nd argument. This is what the compiler is suggesting anyway. But if we can have a look at the method declarations that could help diagnosing the problem.
This isn't an answer to my question, but worth being aware of - apparently there's a quirk in passing properties by reference.