I have a custom class extends RunbaseBatch. In run method I want to get the BatchJob RecId. I try to use these code line:
this.batchInfo().parmBatch();
// or
this.batchInfo().parmBatch().BatchJobId;
But in both case the methods retrieves a null value. Is there any way to get this information? Where can I take this data?
Have a look at the static method BatchHeader::getCurrentBatchHeader (MSDN)
It returns an object of class BatchHeader with a property parmBatchHeaderId which should contain your desired information.
Related
My requirement goes like this.
Log in to the application and open the System property menu to return a value of the property.
Open Another menu in the application and based on the value returned in the above step, perform the test scenario.
The problem is, for each #Test methods in the same class I need to perform both step 1 and 2 which is a time taking and unnecessary. The property retrieved from 'step 1' will be the same throughout the execution of the tests in the class.
Is there anyway I can execute 'step 1' just once at the start of the test and use the property value returned for all the #Test methods in the class following it?
P.S- I checked on the dependsOnMethods annotation and not sure whether it is a solution I am looking for.
If you're using JUnit, it sounds like #BeforeClass is what you are looking for. Method with this annotation runs only once per class and you can store any value returned in a global variable. Or, you might consider #Before annotation (runs before each test) if that suits you better.
Other testing frameworks use similar idea.
I am learning from Stanford's CS193P course. In the class, Paul has a demo project, "Calculator", where he uses id as the type of a property. He intends to not use a specific class, because he does not want to create a new class and then he does not need to write documentation, and even when it is updated, he does not need to redesign the class. id can solve all these problems.
Is this a really a good way? id is the return type of the property, and used as the parameter type of another method. How does the caller know what id is, and how to provide the correct object? By reading code comments?
In general, is there any good reason to use id as a return type or parameter type in public API? (Except init and factory method, though even for those, instancetype is recommended.)
If your method returns a class that is a member of a class cluster, you should return id.
If you're returning an object whose class is opaque, isn't declared in a public header, you should return id. (Cocoa occasionally uses such objects as tokens or context data.)
Container classes should always accept and return their constituents as ids.
I have been seeing some odd behaviour in an entity that I have for which I created a partial class to override the ToSting Method and provide some basic property setting when a new instance of that entity is created (for example I might set an order date to 'Now') in a constructor.
This odd behaviour led me to look closely at the partial class and I was surprised to see that even when a set of pre existing records was being retrieved the constructor was being called for each retrieved record.
below is a very simple example of what I might have:
Partial Public Class Product
Public Sub New()
CostPrice = 0.0
ListPrice = 0.0
End Sub
Public Overrides Function ToString() As String
Return ProductDescription
End Function
End Class
I have two questions that arise from this:
1) is this normal behaviour in the Entity Framework if you add a partial class to which you add a constructor?
2) if not then I must assume that I have done something wrong, so what would be the correct way to
override the constructor to do things similar to the example I mentioned above?
Thanks for any insights that you can give me.
This is using EF 5.0 in a vb project
think to the sequence of events leading to the retrieval of an entity from the database. Basically it should be something like:
query the database
for each row of the query result give an entity
The giving is then as follow for each retrieved row:
create a new instance of the retrieved entity
populate this new instance with the value of the row
Well with each instance creation, the constructor is called.
I think you are mixing:
instance initialization where you "allocate" the object, and
business initialization where you enforce business logic
both may be done, at least partially, in the constructor.
new is always called when a class is first instantiated and if you do not explicitly declare a constructor then a default constructor will be created by the compiler.
Unless the class is static, classes without constructors are given a public default constructor by the C# compiler in order to enable class instantiation.
When defining POCO classes for Entity Framework the class must have a default constructor and EF will always call this default constructor whether you have explicitly defined it or the compiler did it for you.
If for any reason you have need to pass anything into the class when it is instantiated you can use the ObjectContext.ObjectMaterialized event.
In the auto-generated resource designer file, there are properties for each resource. The property calls "GetString" which returns the string value. I would like to override this getstring function so I can do logic to see if I need to retrieve this value or a different value. I can't figure out how to do this because the designer file is auto-generated.
Public ReadOnly Property General() As String
Get
Return ResourceManager.GetString("General", resourceCulture)
End Get
End Property
For example, in my version of the GetString function, I would check the key passed in ("General") and see if there is a custom value for this key in a database. If the custom value exists, I would use that value. If the custom value does not exist, I would call the base GetString function to get the Resource value. I'd like to use the built in Resource class for this because then in my code I can just use "#Resources.General" and take advantage of the auto-complete functionality that already exists.
Refer to ASP.NET Resourcemanager to read local .resx. It's in C# but you can just convert it over. It isn't 100% of what you are looking for but shows a way of overriding in which you may be able to adjust to work with your needs.
Is setX() method name appropriate for only for setting class property X?
For instance, I have a class where the output is a string of an html table. Before you can you can call getTable, you have to call setTable(), which just looks at a other properties and decides how to construct the table. It doesn't actually directly set any class property -- only causes the property to be set. When it's called, the class will construct strHtmlTable, but you can't specify it.
So, calling it setTable breaks the convention of get and set being interfaces for class properties.
Is there another naming convention for this kind of method?
Edit: in this particular class, there are at least two ( and in total 8 optional ) other methods that must be called before the class knows everything it needs to to construct the table. I chose to have the data set as separate methods rather than clutter up the __construct() with 8 optional parameters which I'll never remember the order of.
I would recommend something like generateTable() instead of setTable(). This provides a situation where the name of the method clearly denotes what it does.
I would probably still use a setTable() method to actually set the property, though. Ideally, you could open the possibility of setting a previously defined table for further flexibility.
Yes, setX() is primarily used for setting a field X, though setX() may have some additional code that needs to run in addition to a direct assignment to a field. Using it for something else may be misleading to other developers.
I would definitely recommend against having a public setTable() and would say that setTable() could be omitted or just an unused private method depending upon your requirements.
It sounds like the activity to generate the table is more of a view of other properties on the object, so you might consider moving that to a private method on the object like generateHtmlTable(). This could be done during construction (and upon updates to the object) so that any subsequent calls to getTable() will return the the appropriate HTML.