I was wondering if anyone knew how I could get a reference to the actual array or associative array or whatever data structure stores the loaded modules in Dojo.
What I am doing is this: I work in a team. We have a fairly complex page that takes forever to load because it has to wait for some Ajax calls that take a long time. Also, it relies on a lot of required Dojo modules. So my coworker devised a way to load this "template" once, and then refresh the "actual" page I am working on by use of a hashtag listener.
So anyways, in order to speed up development, I need to be able to reload custom Dojo modules I've edited. I mean, when I edit one of our modules, I don't want to have to reload everything else. Just that one module.
I was using require.undef, but that just stopped working. And I'd like to see if I can get a reference to the place where the modules are actually stored, so I can check it out in Firebug.
Thanks!!
Related
I find, even when assigning the decorator #singleton(false) to the view-model, that while the view-model does then persist as a singleton across activation/deactivation, the bindings and components, etc do not.
(I assume this is because they are stored in a container that is disposed on deactivation.)
The result is that upon every deactivation/activation of a view with a singleton view-model, the view is un-bound and then re-bound.
Is it possible to cause the bindings to persist across deactivation/activation?
This one stumped me for a good while. It also confused me as to why implementing it was not a higher priority for the Aurelia Team.
This takes a fair amount of code to get working. I have put the code in a Gist here: https://gist.github.com/Vaccano/1e862b9318f4f0a9a8e1176ff4fb727e
All the files are new ones except the last, which is a modification to your main.ts file. Also, all my code is in Typescript. If you are using Javascript you will have to translate it.
The basic idea behind it is that you cache the view and the view model. And your replace the router with a caching router. So when the user navigates back to your page, it checks first to see if there is a view/view model already created and uses that instead of making a new one.
NOTE: This is not "component" level code. That means I have tested that this works for the scenario that I use it for.
I got my start for making this change here: https://github.com/aurelia/router/issues/173 There is another user (Scapal) made something that works for him and posted it there. If what I am posting does not work for you, his may help you out.
i'm also interested in an answer to this.
maybe i'm now making a complete fool out of me but why not use aurelia-history navigate(..) command?
I want to evaluate my content blocks before running my test suite but the closures' property names is in bytecode already. I'm ooking for the cleanest solution (compared with parsing source manually).
Already tried solution outlined in this post (and I'd still wind up doing some RegEx/parsing) but could only get it to work via script execution engine. It failed in IDE and GroovyConsole. Rather than embedding a Groovy script in project's code, I thought I'd try using Geb's native classes.
Is building on the suggestion about extending Geb Navigators here viable for Geb's PageContentSupport class whose contentTemplates contain a LinkedHashMap of exactly what I need? If yes, would someone provide guidance? If no, any suggestions?
It is currently not possible to get hold of all content elements for a given page/module. Feel free to create an issue for this in Geb's bug tracker, but remember that all that Geb can provide is either a list of content element names or a map from these names to closures that create these elements.
Having that information isn't a generic solution to your problem because it's possible for content elements to take parameters and there are situations where your content elements will be available on the page only after some other actions are performed (for example you have to click on button to reveal a section of a page that uses ajax to retrieve it's content). So I'm afraid that simply going over all elements and checking if they don't throw any errors will not cut it.
I'm still struggling to see what would "evaluating" all content elements prior to running the suite buy you. Are you after verifying that your content elements still work to get a faster feedback than running the whole suite? I'm pretty sure that you won't be able to fully automate detection of content definitions that don't work anymore. In my view it will be more effort than it's worth.
This is my first time asking a question here so, be nice;p .. I'm working with Magento (and Zend Framework) for the first time and I'm trying to build a custom grid that will populate based off of a manually written query. I'm trying to extend the Mage_Core_Model_Mysql4_Collection_Abstract to allow a query to be loaded into it and then parse the select fields in the extended Grid class to make it dynamic... Is this even possible or am I beating a dead horse? I've been at it for a week now and I'm not getting anywhere. The problem seems to be that inside the __Model_mysql4_Collection class has to be initialized with a resource model using _init() in the constuct
As a learning exercise use the module creator to make an admin grid page and see how that is done. Or even modify it's output to get what you need.
There will be a grid container block, a grid block (with _prepareCollection and _prepareColumns methods), a model, a resource model (representing a single record) and a collection resource model (representing several records).
Providing your own _init methods shouldn't be any sort of problem. Perhaps you'd like to post your config.xml and code so far as a pastebin or something.
I have an old VW3/ENVY image with a parcel loaded as unmanaged code (exactly the situation Mastering ENVY/DEVELOPER warns against). Unfortunately, this problem happened a long time ago and it's too late to just "go back" to an image without the parcel loaded.
Apparently, there is a way to solve this problem (we have one development image where this has been solved, and there are normal configuration maps that contain the exact same code as the unmanaged parcel but they can't be loaded), but the exact way has long since been forgotten (and there are some problems with taking that particular dev image as the base for a new runtime image, so I need to find out how how to do it again).
In theory, it should be possible to remove the parcel and reload the code from a configuration map. In practice, all normal ways (using the ParcelBrowser or directly calling UnmanagedCode>>remove) fail. I even tried manually removing the offending selectors from the method dictionary, but past a certain point (involving a call to #primBecome:) the whole image hangs completely (I can't even drop into the debugger). I started hacking the instances of the classes and methods, hoping I'd trick ENVY into thinking that these particular methods are normal versioned code, but without any success yet.
Are there any smalltalk/envy gurus around that still remember enough of VW 3 to provide me with any pointers?
Status update
After a week of trying to solve the problem I finally made it, at least partially, so in case anyone's interested...
First, I had to fix file pointers for the umnanaged code (otherwise, all everything that tried to touch the methods would throw an exception). It looks like ENVY extends Parcel so that, in theory, all integer file pointers are changed to ENVY's void filepointer when loaded, but in my case, I had to do it manually (a Parcel provides enumeration for all selectors it defines). Another way would be to tweak the filePointer code, but that can't easily be done automatically on every image where it's needed.
Then, the parcel can be discarded, which drops the parcel information, but keeps the code. The official "Discard" mechanism needs to have a valid changes file (which envy doesn't use so it has to be set manually, and reset afterwards) and the parcel source (which we fortunately had).
To be able to make any changes to the methods (either manually, or via loading an application or class from ENVY), they need to get rid of their unmanaged status. This can be done by manually tweaking TheClass>>applicationAssocs (I also got rid of all references to the classes in UnmanagedCode sich as timestamps, and removed the reference to the discarded parcel). I actually had some info on how to get to this point from my boss, but I haven't been able to understand the instructions until I almost figured it out by myself.
This finally allowed me to load and reload all the Applications that contained the classes. In theory. In practice, the image still hung completely whenever I tried to load a newer version of the Application (that contained the code formerly in the parcel).
It turned out that the crashes had absolutely nothing to do with the code being unmanaged, but with the fact that the parcel in question modified InputState>>process:, where it caused an exception due to a missing and/or uninitialized class variable (the InputState>>initialize method wasn't called until after the new process: method was in place). I had to modify the Notifier class to dump all exceptions to a file to find out what was going on. Adding the class variable to the source of the class (instead of adding it via reflection), suspending the input processing thread via toBeLoadedCode and starting it again in the loaded method and creating a new version of the application solved even this problem.
Now everything works, in theory. In practice it's still unusable, because reloading the WindowSystem or VisualworksBase applications causes their initialization blocks to run, and a whole lot of settings are reset to their defaults - fonts and font sizes, window colors, UI settings... And there doesn't seem to be any way to just save the settings to a file and load them later on, or just to see what all the settings are (either the official Settings menu doesn't show everything, or we have a heavily tweaked image... so much for reconstructing it from scratch). But that's a completely different question.
Well, normally the recommendation would be that you should be able to rebuild your development image from scratch by loading your code from the repository. But if you had that, then the answer would be simple, just discard that image and reload. I think it's been long enough that I've lost whatever knowledge I've had about how to mess with the internal structures to get it back, and it sounds like you've tried a lot of things. So, although it might be painful, figuring out the recipe to rebuild your development image by loading stuff from the repository sounds like it may be your best bet. It probably isn't all that horrible, there just might be a few dependencies on the image state, or special doits that need to be executed.
You also probably need to validate what's in the repository against what's in the image you're working from. If there was unmanaged code loaded and then someone modified it and saved it, it's not clear to me that it would have been saved to ENVY. So you probably want to audit everything that was unmanaged code and if it's been changed, save that to a repository edition.
Sorry I don't have any better answers.
Using the dojo toolkit, what is the proper way of locally testing code that will be executed as cross-domain, without making the actual build?
As it appears, there are three possible options (each, with their own drawbacks):
Using local (non xd) XMLHttpRequest dojo.require
This option does not really test the xd behavior, since it dojo.require[s] the js synchronously via XHR.
djConfig.debugAtAllCosts = true;
Although this option does load the required code asynchronously (via the 'script' tag), it also pulls the code in via XHR, parses the dojo.require[s] inside that, and pulls them in. This (using the loader_debug), again, is not what the loader_xd is doing. More info on this topic in a different question.
Creating a cross-domain build
This approach requires a build, which is not possible in the environment which I'm running the code in (We're using our own on-the-fly build process, which includes only the js that is necessary for a particular page. This process is not suitable for development).
Thus, my question: is there a way to use the loader_xd, which does not require an xd build (which adds the xd prefix / suffix to every file)?
The 2nd way (using the debugAtAllCosts) also makes me question the motivation for pre-parsing the dojo.require[s]. If the loader_xd will not (or rather can not) pre-parse, why is the method that was created for testing/debugging doing so?
peller has described the situation. If you wanted to just generate .xd.js file for your modules, you could look at util/buildscripts/jslib/buildUtilXd.js and its buildUtilXd.xdgen() function.
It would take a bit of work to make your own script, but you could look at util/buildscripts/build.js for pointers.
I am hoping in the future for Dojo (maybe Dojo 2.x timeframe) we can switch to a loader that just uses script tags with a module format that has a function wrapper around the module, something that is coded by the developer. This would allow the same module format to work in the local and xd cases.
I don't think there's any way to do XD loading without building and deploying it. Your analysis of the various options seems about right.
debugAtAllCosts is there specifically to solve a debugging problem, where most browsers, until recently, could not do anything intelligent with code brought in through eval. Still today, Firefox will report exception in the console as appearing at the eval site (bootstrap.js) with a line number offset from the eval, rather than from the actual eval buffer, and normally that eval buffer is anonymous. Firebug was the first debugger to jump through some hoops to enhance the debugging experience and permitted special metadata that Dojo's loader injects between the XHR and the eval to determine a filepath to the source. Webkit/Safari have recently implemented this also. I believe debugAtAllCosts pre-dates the XD loader.