I want to write something like this inside my src/core/Chessman.js file:
import King from './chessmen/King'
class Chessman {
static factory(side, quality) {
switch(quality) {
case 'king' : return new King(side) break
// ... other qualities
}
constructor(side) { this.side = side }
cast(position, ref) { }
run(position, startRef, endRef) {}
}
and inside my src/core/chessmen/King.js file:
import Chessman from '../Chessman'
class King extends Chessman {
constructor(side) {
super(side)
this.iterative = false // true for Queens, Rooks and Bishop
this.directions = [
'up', 'up+right', 'right', 'right+down',
'down', 'down+left', 'left', 'left+top'
]
}
// overrides parent behavior
cast(position, ref) {}
run(position, startRef, endRef) {}
}
But sadly I get the error (while testing) with Karma, jasmine and babel
TypeError: Super expression must either be null or a function, not undefined
at src/core/chessmen/King.js:57
And there's no line 57 for the moment in King.js !
You have a circular dependency error. Given what you've shown us, consider the following steps:
Chessman.js starts loading
It pauses execution so its dependencies can load.
King.js starts loading since it is a dependency.
King.js throws because class King extends Chessman runs, but Chessman has not been set yet, because it paused on step #2
You'd be much better off moving your factory function to its own file, to avoid cyclical dependencies. The only safe circular dependencies in JS are ones that are not needed when the module itself is initialized. Since class extends X runs at module initialization time, it is not safe for cycles.
If this was literally your only class, you could write your app such that King.js was imported before Chessman.js, but given your usage of a factory, and your naming scheme, I assume there are other chess pieces. Since every single chess piece class will trigger this issue, there is no way to import them in the correct order. Avoiding the issue by moving the factory function out of Chessman.js is the only solution to this.
If you want to have a factory, instead of saving it directly in the base class module, move it to it's own module - chessman.factory.js. There, do whatever Chessman.factory does in a method or something. This way the chessman.js module wouldn't have to know about modules that need itself,
Related
I cannot give too much information here (because there really isn't), but only this:
All of the sudden, after adding a #Method function to a stencil component:
#Method()
async setMenuItems(items: Element[]): Promise<void> {
// code here
}
the component stopped compiling with the following - really unhelpful - error:
[ ERROR ] ./src/components/menu-content/menu-content.tsx:63:44
build error
L62: #Method()
L63: async setMenuItems(elements: Element[]): Promise<void> {
L64: const unsupportedChildren = elements.filter(e => !this.isSupportedChild(e)).map(e => e.tagName);
[12:37.1] build failed in 7.02 s
Things to notice
the return type Promise<void> inside the error-message is highlighted red
there are other #Methods that do work within this component (even with the same return type).
the "broken" #Method is structurally equal to those that do work.
TypeScript compiler does not complain about anything
Only stencil compiler fails
I already tried...
to google for this issue - did not find any hints to this problem
to remove the async and add return Promise.resolve()
to rename the method (I mean.. why not)
to move the method to another place in class
to remove the whole method (compiles fine x( )
to remove the #Method decorator (compiled, but of course my method is removed from API)
to delete node_modules folder and reinstall
I remember that I already had this error once, and apparently I somehow fixed it (or not, idk). But if I did, I cannot remember how.
Does anyone have an idea how to debug this - or even better fix?
I figured it out. A more complete version of my component is:
import { Element, ... } from '#stencil/core';
class MenuContent {
#Element() element: MenuContentElement;
#Method()
setMenuItems(elements: Element[]): Promise<void> {
// ------------------^^^^^^^
// Element is meant to be the built-in browser interface for Element
// but stencil thinks that this is the imported Element from '#stencil/core'!
}
}
The exact problem here is, that the stencil-compiler seems to assume that the elements parameter is of type Element that is imported from #stencil/core which is obviously wrong and leads to this strange unhelpful error.
Possible Solutions
1. Use an alias type for the built-in Element type
// types.ts
export type DomElement = Element;
// menu-content.tsx
import { DomElement } from './types';
...
async setMenuItems(elements: DomElement[]): Promise<void> { ... }
2. Switch to HTMLElement
Note: This is only legit, when you don't need to support other Element-types such as SVGElements for example!
async setMenuItems(elements: HTMLElement[]): Promise<void> { ... }
3. Use alias in import statement
Please note: When using #stencil eslint rules, they will complain about your renamed import and say that "own class members are not allowed to be public".
I created a ticket for it here: https://github.com/ionic-team/stencil-eslint/issues/28
import { Element as ElementDecorator} from '#stencil/core';
class MenuContent {
// eslint will complain about that:
// "Own class properties cannot be public."
#ElementDecorator() element: HTMLMenuContentElement;
}
I experienced this same issue not with the Element type but with the Event type, so it appears to be rooted deeper - also about a year after you reported this issue it seems to still be a problem with Stencil
Recently, I am learning Phaser 3 to build a game, and using Typescript to write the code.
besides, I am trying to create different objects by using Object-oriented programming inside Phaser class.
The code I wrote is below:
class DifferentGraphics extends Phaser.Scene {
constructor() {
super({
key: "DifferentGraphics"
});
}
create() {
class Graphic {
graphic: Phaser.GameObjects.Graphics;
graphicAdd() {
this.graphic.fillRect(100, 100, 200, 200);
this.graphic.fillStyle(0xffffff);
}
}
let GraphicA = new Graphic();
GraphicA.graphicAdd();
}
}
Compiler didn’t show any Typescript error, but the browser displayed “Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property ’ fillRect ’ of undefined” after running the code.
I don’t know what’s wrong with my code?
If anyone can share your ideas or solutions, I will appreciate it.
The target I wanna achieve is to make 3 different objects, and these objects have different colors, sizes, positions, and methods that can tween the size separately by using Object-oriented programming.
How can I do to make it happen?
I need a direction or suggestion
Thank you
this.graphic is not initialized
You must initialize this.graphic in constructor, e.g
class Graphic {
graphic: Phaser.GameObjects.Graphics;
constructor(scene){
this.graphic = scene.add.graphics(0,0);
}
graphicAdd() {
this.graphic.fillRect(100, 100, 200, 200);
this.graphic.fillStyle(0xffffff);
}
}
then let GraphicA = new Graphic(this);
I have a Spock class, that when run as a test suite, throws Unable to resolve iconRow as content for geb.Page, or as a property on its Navigator context. Is iconRow a class you forgot to import? unless I annotate my class with #Stepwise. However, I really don't want the test execution to stop on the first failure, which #Stepwise does.
I've tried writing (copy and pasting) my own extension using this post, but I still get these errors. It is using my extension, as I added some logging statements that were printed out to the console.
Here is one of my modules:
class IconRow extends Module {
static content = {
iconRow (required: false) {$("div.report-toolbar")}
}
}
And a page that uses it:
class Report extends SomeOtherPage {
static at = {$("div.grid-container").displayed}
static content = {
iconRow { module IconRow }
}
}
And a snippet of the test that is failing:
class MyFailingTest extends GebReportingSpec {
def setupSpec() {
via Dashboard
SomeClass.login("SourMonk", "myPassword")
assert page instanceof Dashboard
nav.goToReport("Some report name")
assert page instanceof Report
}
#Unroll
def "I work"() {
given:
at Report
expect:
this == that
where:
this << ["some list", "of values"]
that << anotherModule.someContent*.#id
}
#Unroll
def "I don't work"() {
given:
at Report
expect:
this == that
where:
this << ["some other", "list", "of values"]
that << iconRow.columnHeaders*.attr("innerText")*.toUpperCase()
}
}
When executed as a suite I work passes and I don't work fails because it cannot identify "iconRow" as content for the page. If I switch the order of the test cases, I don't work will pass and I work will fail. Alternatively, if I execute each test separately, they both pass.
What I have tried:
Adding/removing the required: true property from content in the modules
Prefixing the module name with the class, such as IconRow.iconRow
Defining my modules as static #Shared properties
Initialize the modules both in and outside of my setupSpec()
Making simple getter methods in each module's class that return the module, and referencing content such as IconRow.getIconRow().columnHeaders*.attr("innerText")*.toUpperCase()
Moving the contents of my setupSpec() into setup()
Adding autoClearCookies = false into my GebConfig.groovy
Making a #Shared Report report variable and prefix all modules with that such as report.iconRow
Very peculiar note about that last bullet point -- it magically resolves the modules that don't have the prefix -- so it won't resolve report.IconRow but will resolve just iconRow -- absolutely bizarre, because if I remove that variable the module that was just previously working suddenly can't be resolved again. I even tried declaring this variable and then not prefixing anything, and that did not work either.
Another problem that I keep banging my head against the wall with is that I'm also not sure of where the problem is. The error it throws leads me to believe that it's a project setup issue, but running each feature individually works fine, so it appears to be resolving the classes just fine.
On the other hand, perhaps it's an issue with the session and/or cookies? Although I have yet to see any official documentation on this, it seems to be the general consensus (from other posts and articles I've read) that only using #Stepwise will maintain your session between feature methods. If this is the case, why is my extension not working? It's pretty much a copy and paste of #Stepwise without the skipFeaturesAfterFirstFailingFeature method (I can post if needed), unless there is some other stuff going on behind the scenes with #Stepwise.
Apologies for the wall of text, but I've been trying to figure this out for about 6 hours now, so my brain is pretty fried.
Geb has special support for #Stepwise, if a spec is annotated with it it does not call resetBrowser() after each test, instead it is called after the spec is completed. See the code on github
So basically you need to change your setupSpec to setup so that it will be executed before each test.
Regarding your observation, if you just run a focused test the setupSpec is executed for that test and thus it passes. The problem arises, that the cleanup is invoked afterwards and resets the browser, breaking subsequent tests.
EDIT
I overlooked your usage of where blocks, everything in the where block needs to be statically (#Shared) available, so using instance level constructs won't work. Resetting the browser will also kill every reference so just getting it before wont work either. Basically, don't use Geb objects in where blocks!
Looking at your code however I don't see any reason to use data driven tests here.
This can be easily done with one assertion in a normal test
It is good practice for unit tests to just test one thing. Geb however, is not an unit test but an acceptance/frontend test. The problem here is that they are way slower than unit tests and it makes sense to combine sensible assertions into one test.
class MyFailingTest extends GebReportingSpec {
def setup() {
via Dashboard
SomeClass.login("SourMonk", "myPassword")
assert page instanceof Dashboard
nav.goToReport("Some report name")
assert page instanceof Report
}
def "I work"() {
given:
at Report
expect:
["some list", "of values"] == anotherModule.someContent*.#id
}
def "I don't work"() {
given:
at Report
expect:
["some other", "list", "of values"] == iconRow.columnHeaders*.attr("innerText")*.toUpperCase()
}
}
I am trying to refactor some test code and in two packages I need to do the same thing (connect to a DB). I am getting an import cycle. I get why I can't do it, but am wondering what the best way around it is.
Some specifics, I have three packages: testutils, client, engine.
In engine I define an interface & implementation (both exported).
package engine
type interface QueryEngine {
// ...
}
type struct MagicEngine {
// ...
}
And then in the testutils package I will create a MagicEngine and try and return it.
package testutils
func CreateAndConnect() (*engine.MagicEngine, error) {
// ....
}
Now in the test code (using a TestMain) I need to do something like
package engine
func TestMain(m *testing.M) {
e, err := testutils.CreateAndConnect()
// ....
os.Exit(m.Run())
}
This is of course a cycle. I want to do this so that I can in the client package also use this testutils.CreateAndConnect() method. I don't want to repeat the code in both packages. I don't want it in the main code of the engine package, it is very specific to the tests.
I tried adding it as an exported method on the engine test class (engine/engine_test.go) and using it in the client/client_test.go. No dice. :/
I feel I have done this in other languages, but could be crazy. What is the best way to structure this code for reusability?
You could use black-box style testing because the components of engine are exported. Change your tests to be in package engine_test:
package engine_test
import "engine"
import "testutils"
func TestMain(m *testing.M) {
e, err := testutils.CreateAndConnect()
// ....
os.Exit(m.Run())
}
I want to use something like Cucumber JVM to drive performance tests written for Gatling.
Ideally the Cucumber features would somehow build a scenario dynamically - probably reusing predefined chain objects similar to the method described in the "Advanced Tutorial", e.g.
val scn = scenario("Scenario Name").exec(Search.search("foo"), Browse.browse, Edit.edit("foo", "bar")
I've looked at how the Maven plugin executes the scripts, and I've also seen mention of using an App trait but I can't find any documentation for the later and it strikes me that somebody else will have wanted to do this before...
Can anybody point (a Gatling noob) in the direction of some documentation or example code of how to achieve this?
EDIT 20150515
So to explain a little more:
I have created a trait which is intended to build up a sequence of, I think, ChainBuilders that are triggered by Cucumber steps:
trait GatlingDsl extends ScalaDsl with EN {
private val gatlingActions = new ArrayBuffer[GatlingBehaviour]
def withGatling(action: GatlingBehaviour): Unit = {
gatlingActions += action
}
}
A GatlingBehaviour would look something like:
object Google {
class Home extends GatlingBehaviour {
def execute: ChainBuilder =
exec(http("Google Home")
.get("/")
)
}
class Search extends GatlingBehaviour {...}
class FindResult extends GatlingBehaviour {...}
}
And inside the StepDef class:
class GoogleStepDefinitions extends GatlingDsl {
Given( """^the Google search page is displayed$""") { () =>
println("Loading www.google.com")
withGatling(Home())
}
When( """^I search for the term "(.*)"$""") { (searchTerm: String) =>
println("Searching for '" + searchTerm + "'...")
withGatling(Search(searchTerm))
}
Then( """^"(.*)" appears in the search results$""") { (expectedResult: String) =>
println("Found " + expectedResult)
withGatling(FindResult(expectedResult))
}
}
The idea being that I can then execute the whole sequence of actions via something like:
val scn = Scenario(cucumberScenario).exec(gatlingActions)
setup(scn.inject(atOnceUsers(1)).protocols(httpConf))
and then check the reports or catch an exception if the test fails, e.g. response time too long.
It seems that no matter how I use the 'exec' method it tries to instantly execute it there and then, not waiting for the scenario.
Also I don't know if this is the best approach to take, we'd like to build some reusable blocks for our Gatling tests that can be constructed via Cucumber's Given/When/Then style. Is there a better or already existing approach?
Sadly, it's not currently feasible to have Gatling directly start a Simulation instance.
Not that's it's not technically feasible, but you're just the first person to try to do this.
Currently, Gatling is usually in charge of compiling and can only be passed the name of the class to load, not an instance itself.
You can maybe start by forking io.gatling.app.Gatling and io.gatling.core.runner.Runner, and then provide a PR to support this new behavior. The former is the main entry point, and the latter the one can instanciate and run the simulation.
I recently ran into a similar situation, and did not want to fork gatling. And while this solved my immediate problem, it only partially solves what you are trying to do, but hopefully someone else will find this useful.
There is an alternative. Gatling is written in Java and Scala so you can call Gatling.main directly and pass it the arguments you need to run the Gatling Simulation you want. The problem is, the main explicitly calls System.exit so you have to also use a custom security manager to prevent it from actually exiting.
You need to know two things:
the class (with the full package) of the Simulation you want to run
example: com.package.your.Simulation1
the path where the binaries are compiled.
The code to run a Simulation:
protected void fire(String gatlingGun, String binaries){
SecurityManager sm = System.getSecurityManager();
System.setSecurityManager(new GatlingSecurityManager());
String[] args = {"--simulation", gatlingGun,
"--results-folder", "gatling-results",
"--binaries-folder", binaries};
try {
io.gatling.app.Gatling.main(args);
}catch(SecurityException se){
LOG.debug("gatling test finished.");
}
System.setSecurityManager(sm);
}
The simple security manager i used:
public class GatlingSecurityManager extends SecurityManager {
#Override
public void checkExit(int status){
throw new SecurityException("Tried to exit.");
}
#Override
public void checkPermission(Permission perm) {
return;
}
}
The problem is then getting the information you want out of the simulation after it has been run.