I am struggling to get Arquillian to run on an esoteric project that I am working on. Whilst I am still working on this failure to run, which has to do with sharing and referencing wildfly modules, I am also getting the following warning out of Arquillian.
For peace of mind and in the hope of identifying whether the warning is a contributing factor to the issues I am having, I would like to understand its cause and how to stop it.
I get the following on deploy...
May 09, 2017 10:44:06 AM org.jboss.arquillian.core.impl.ObserverImpl resolveArguments
WARNING: Argument 2 for ArquillianServiceDeployer.doServiceDeploy is null. It won't be invoked.
and the following on un-deploy...
May 09, 2017 10:44:18 AM org.jboss.arquillian.core.impl.ObserverImpl resolveArguments
WARNING: Argument 2 for ArquillianServiceDeployer.undeploy is null. It won't be invoked.
Related
well, I work on developing a software that is still compiled in Delphi 7, and our team got some errors that were caused by variable that wasn't initialized. So we decided to force a compilation error if the Delphi 7 finds a variable like this, to avoid future errors.
But, the problem is that I didn't found any option about it in Delphi 7, I know that Delphi XE or later has this option.
Do you know some plugin or anything else that can help me on it? It can be some to force a compilation error or find all variable that wasn't initialized on the Project.
i dont have a Delphi 7 at hand. I hope the Directives from the Link work.
So, if your having anly a few Warnings you should enable "Treat warnings as error". (i dont know where that in d7 is, but i believe even d5 had this)
Option Error as Warning
Delphi 2009 where is the 'treat warnings as errors' option?
Hidden Error/Warning Options
https://marc.durdin.net/2012/05/delphi-xe2s-hidden-hints-and-warnings-options/
(untested: Perhaps you can even define except Warnings in d7. For XE see Tools-Debugger Options-Embarcadero Debuggers-Language Exceptions)
When I try to build my project, more often than not compilation fails with the following error message:
Error:java: Equal objects must have equal hashcodes. During rehashing, Trove discovered that the following two objects claim to be equal (as in java.lang.Object.equals() or TObjectHashingStrategy.equals()) but their hashCodes (or those calculated by your TObjectHashingStrategy) are not equal.This violates the general contract of java.lang.Object.hashCode(). See bullet point two in that method's documentation. object #1 =sdk references (class org.jetbrains.jps.model.module.impl.JpsSdkReferencesTableImpl$JpsSdkReferencesTableRole), hashCode=16097604; object #2 =sdk references (class org.jetbrains.jps.model.module.impl.JpsSdkReferencesTableImpl$JpsSdkReferencesTableRole), hashCode=16097604
Sometimes I try building again and it succeeds, other times I have to resort to restarting the IDE. This used to happen with IDEA 2019.2, it is continuing with 2019.3.
Does anyone know what can be done from my side to avoid this internal IDE error? Any hints, suggestions, workarounds?
Update: happened again, (4 hours later,) restarting the IDE did not help, I had to invalidate caches and restart.
When building an application in Visual Studio. It shows the following error when exceeding the error count
fatal error C1003: error count exceeds 100; stopping compilation
Is there a way to increase the error limit?
This limitation is hardcoded. Here is the post from the MSFT employee in the microsoft.public.vsnet.general group dated 2006 (look for 'Fatal Error C1003'):
Hi,
Unfortunately this 100 limitation is
hard coded and cannot be changed. It's
just inpractical to keep all errors
information around since one error may
cause other several errors.
I hope you understand the rational
behind this design by our product
team. However, if you still have
concerns about this, please feel free
to submit your feedback at
http://connect.microsoft.com/Main/content/content.aspx?ContentID=2220
which is monitored by our product
team. Thank you for your
understanding.
Sincerely, Walter Wang
(waw...#online.microsoft.com, remove
'online.') Microsoft Online Community
Support"
I don't think so. VS basically reports all errors it encounters during compilations. There might be some erroneous parts of the code that make the compiler getting caught in an infinite "error" loop.
The limit was implemented to avoid that. In most cases the 100 errors you get are just the same error reported over and over again. What would be the sense in increasing the number of repetitions?
Maybe you can post the code snippet where the error occurs first, so we can help you fix it.
I believe that it is a hard-coded limit, so no.
As others have commented, it's difficult to understand what you want to achieve by this.
At the end of the day, you'll have to fix them all, so get stuck in and start fixing them. Eventually, you'll get below 100, and you can start counting them.
It is not normally valuable to report the actual number of errors when this occurs. Most of the time, when you get C1003, it's actually only a few real errors, leading to a massive chain of other errors.
(e.g.)
If there is an error in a .h file, that error will be reported in every .cpp file that #includes it.
If there is an error that prevents any kind of identifier being defined (e.g. a class, variable, method name), then every time you try to use it later on, an error will be reported.
Workaround to reduce number of reported errors:
rename cl.exe to cl-orig.exe
roll your own cl.exe that launches cl-orig.exe, capturing its stdout / stderr
parse stderr, looking for error messages and counting them
breaks after first n errors
See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms682499(v=vs.85).aspx for some hints.
I also have a project like this: sometimes Visual Studio decides there is a lot to do, emits 100 really irrelevant messages about other parts of the solution and aborts the build because it reached the message limit without working on the project I'm interested on.
The workaround we have found is to use msbuild to build the solution from a command prompt: the Use MSBuild walkthrough outlines the steps. msbuild outputs all messages to the console and once the build completes we can work and debug again in Visual Studio. Not ideal, but it lets us complete the task at hand.
I keep getting this error:
Jan 31 13:56:51 Michaels-MacBook-Air.local CocoaDrawing[2129] <Error>: The function 'CGContextErase' is obsolete and will be removed in an upcoming update. Unfortunately, this application, or a library it uses, is using this obsolete function, and is thereby contributing to an overall degradation of system performance.
My program doesn't call that method directly, and frustratingly, I can't find any documentation on this function.
This happens even with a blank (Cocoa) Xcode project. Why am I getting this error?
I had this problem. It was caused by an outdated Wacom Tablet driver. If you have such a driver installed I'd recommend removing it, then reinstalling a more recent driver. That did the trick for me.
As part of the migration of my app to .NET 4, I'm struggling to get some of the WPF unit tests working again with TeamCity.
On all the tests that are somehow using a WPF control (a ListItem for example), I get an exception I didn't get before:
System.InvalidOperationException: The calling thread must be STA, because many UI components require this.
I understand what it means, and after checking, it turns out that my thread is indeed MTA, not STA.
My problem is that I have no idea on how to fix this, and where this problem could be coming from...
Is it a setting on TeamCity? MSpec?
Again, it worked before I switched to .NET 4.
I tried many different solutions, but nothing worked.
I'm also a bit puzzled by the fact that no-one reported this before (with my specific stack of TeamCity + MSpec + WPF test), which might mean I'm doing something very wrong somewhere.
If you have a clue, please let me know!
Full exception:
System.InvalidOperationException: The calling thread must be STA, because many UI components require this.
at System.Windows.Input.InputManager..ctor()
at System.Windows.Input.InputManager.GetCurrentInputManagerImpl()
at System.Windows.Input.KeyboardNavigation..ctor()
at System.Windows.FrameworkElement.EnsureFrameworkServices()
at System.Windows.FrameworkElement..ctor()
at System.Windows.Controls.Control..ctor()
at MyCompany.Dashboard.Client.Plugins.Common.Controls.Grids.CashflowGrid.ViewModel.ConfigureViewModel.CreateItem(String name) in d:\Program Files\JetBrains\BuildAgent2\work\6dd9af6ae2f9bbb9\Code\Src\MyCompany\Dashboard\Client\Plugins\Common\Controls\Grids\CashflowGrid\ViewModel\ConfigureViewModel.cs:line 171
at MyCompany.Dashboard.Client.Plugins.Common.Controls.Grids.CashflowGrid.ViewModel.ConfigureViewModel.Initialise(Type type, IList`1 currentSelection, Action`1 selectionChangedCallback) in d:\Program Files\JetBrains\BuildAgent2\work\6dd9af6ae2f9bbb9\Code\Src\MyCompany\Dashboard\Client\Plugins\Common\Controls\Grids\CashflowGrid\ViewModel\ConfigureViewModel.cs:line 37
at UnitTests.Plugins.Common.Controls.Grids.CashflowGrid.ViewModel.when_some_items_are_selected_on_the_chosen_list.<.ctor>b__1() in d:\Program Files\JetBrains\BuildAgent2\work\6dd9af6ae2f9bbb9\Code\Src\UnitTests.Plugins.Common\Controls\Grids\CashflowGrid\ViewModel\ConfigureViewModelTests.cs:line 82
For this exception, the code is simply trying to instantiate a ListBoxItem, nothing fancy, but doing that on a MTA thread breaks it.
What I tried:
Setting the current thread to STA
Thread.CurrentThread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA)
It of course doesn't work because it's only possible before the thread starts
Run the code in a separate thread that was initialised as STA:
very complex since, due to the nature of MSpec, different methods are called at different time so you can't run EVERYTHING under the same thread. More precisely, you can't run the "Establish context" on the same thread as the "Because of" statement.
Use the STAThread attribute... yes but where? never worked anywhere I
tried
Example of a failing test:
public class StaTestExample
{
Establish context = () => _control = new ListBox();
It should_not_be_null = () => _control.ShouldNotBeNull();
protected static Control _control;
}
It now works.
But the problem is we just can't explain it. And it still fails on a different build server, but we don't care about this one.
In case someone gets that problem, here what we did:
Disabling test coverage
Disabling the MSPec task: the build goes green
Re-enabling coverage and MSpec: it works...
The odd thing is that exact process was applied on a different build server (an old one we don't use anymore), and it still fails.
There's nothing else we could think of that changed.
So it's a bit of a mystery... I hope it won't come back to bite us!