My scenario is the following:
I have a workflow (lets call it customActivity1) that do the basic actions for my system. I also have another workflow (customActivity2) that uses customActivity1 and do higher level actions. When I call customActivity1, I must pass on a few parameters, like Boolean or String values. I want to show some of these parameters as a checkbox or combobox (so the developer of customActivity2 can pass on only valid values) and found out that I can do that by setting the argument as PROPERTY (instead of In).
By doing a research, I also found out that you can’t directly use this argument in expressions, so I keep getting errors on my customActivity1.
That said and knowing that I need to narrow what the designer can pass on, how could I do that without using an activity designer or where could I find an answer?
I also attached two pictures, one of what I need and the other of the error I’m getting.
Thanks in advance.
The reason an InArgument only shows you a text field instead of a checkbox is because they are expressions not literal values. There is still type checking though, if you enter the value 1 you get the error message that an integer cannot be converted into a boolean.
You cannot do this. You can only bind to InArguments.
If you bind an InArgument and look at the xaml, you'll see something like this:
<p1:MyActivity MyInArgument="[BoundValue]" ...
The Workflow Runtime knows how to handle these. It doesn't know how to handle binding POCO properties.
If you want to model data flow but want to have a different user experience in the property grid I recommed using arguments (as they convey data flow semantics) and customizing the property grid for those arguments. There is a sample that demonstrates how to do this in the WF4 samples (sample readme available at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee834515.aspx)
Related
This is about an API handling the validation during saving an object. Which means that the front-end client sends a request to the API to a specific end point, then on the back-end the API creates a new object if the right conditions are meet.
Right now the regular method that we use is that the models has a ruleset for each fields and then the validation is invoked when the save function is invoked, but technically the validation is done right before the object is saved into the database.
Then during today's code review I came across a solution which I wasn't sure if it's a good practice or not. And it was about that the front-end must send a specific parameter to the API every time. This is because other APIs are using our API as well, and we needed to know if the request was sent as and API request or a browser request. If this parameter is present then we want to execute an extra validation function on a specific field.
(1)If I would have to implement it, then I would check the incoming parameter in the service handler or in the controller level, and if I got one, I would invoke the validation right away, and if it fails I would throw an error.
(2)The implementation I saw however adds an extra variable to the model, and sets the model variable when there is an incoming parameter, then validates only when the save function is invoked on the object(which first validates the ruleset defined on the object fields, then saves the object into the database)
So my problem with (2) is that the object now grown bigger with an extra variable that is only related to a specific event. So I would say it's better to implement (1). But (2) also has an advantage, and that is when you create the object on different end point by parsing the parameters, then the validation will work there as well, even if the developer forget to update the code there.
Now this may seems like a silly question because, why would I care about just 1 extra variable, but this is like a bedrock of something good or bad. So if I say this is ok, then from now on the models will start growing with extra variables that are only related to specific events, which I think should be handled on the controller/service handler level. On the other hand the code would be more reliable if it's not the developer who should remember all the 6712537 functionalities and keep them in mind when makes some changes somewhere. Let's say all the devs will get heart attack tomorrow from the excitement of an amazing discovery, and a new developer has to work on the project while he doesn't know about these small details, and then he has to change something on the code that is related to this functionality - so that new feature should be supported by this old one as well.
So my question is if is there any good practice on this, and what do you think what would be the best approach?
So I spent some time on thinking on the solution, and I think the best is to have an array of acceptable trigger variables in the model class. Then when the parameters are passed to the model on the controller level, then the loader function can be modified that it takes the trigger variables from the parameters and save it in the model's associative array variable that stores the trigger variables.
By default this array is empty, and it doesn't matter how much new variables are needed to be created, it will only contain the necessary ones when those are used.
Then of course the loader function needs to be modified in a way that it can filter out the non trigger variables as well as it is done for the regular fields, and there can be even a rule set of validation on the trigger variables if necessary.
So this solves the problem with overgrowing the object with unnecessary variables and the centralized validation part, because now the validation can be always done in the model instead of the controller.
And since the loader function is modified to store the trigger variables in the model's trigger variables array variable, the developer never has to remember that this functionality was created. Which is good, because in the future when he creates a new related function or end point that should handle object creation, he will not miss it to validate it against the old functionality, because the the loader function that he modified in the past like this will handle it for him.
It needs to be noted tho, that since the loader function doesn't differentiate between the parameters, and where to load them other then checking the names of the parameters with the filter functions, these parameter names should be identical from each other, otherwise a buggy functionality can be created accidentally. Like if you forget that a model attribute with the same name was used, then you can accidentally trigger an event that was programmed to be triggered if the trigger variable with the same name is present. However this can be solved by prefixing the trigger variables for example.
In our company, repository objects must be created with original language EN.
Is there a way to check the logon language in case of creating a new object in the ABAP repository?
Desired behaviour:
SE80 - Create program/class/data element/table/....
==> user exit/badi checks the logon language. When it is not 'EN', the creation will be refused.
regards,
Umar Abdullah
I know there is a exit for this but I haven't remember exact name. You can use general purpose for finding exit. Go to SE24 and open CL_EXITHANDLER class, find GET_INSTANCE method and add break point. Then start creating item, it will pause on debugger multiple times, try to find suitable one.
As #mkysoft suggested, you may implement a check in the BAdI CTS_REQUEST_CHECK, method CHECK_BEFORE_ADD_OBJECTS, which is invoked when the object is about to be attached to a transport request. Raise the exception CANCEL to make the attachment fail (and so the object is not created too).
EDIT: sorry, ignore my answer, "this method is NOT released for Customer usage" as said in note 2150125 - Method CHECK_BEFORE_ADD_OBJECTS not triggered
DISCLAIMER: THE METHOD DESCRIBED HERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOT RECOMMENDED.
As correctly pointed out by the other members there is no standard and customer-exposed method to achieve your requirement, but if you absolutely must enable this check during creation you can use the below method. As well as the previously offered to you, it also involves modification of SAP standard.
There is a system BAdi CTS_TADIR_SUBSCREEN that is located inside enhancement point CTS_ES_TADIR_POPUP. They are SAP internal and not released for customer usage, so do this at your own risk.
Implementation procedure:
Step 0. First thing you need to change is a SAP internal usage flag, for which you need Object Access key which can be obtained from SAP or from SAP partner that made the implementation in your org. In virgin state this BAdi throws the error if you try to implement it
So hereinafter we assume that you already ticked off this checkbox in BAdi settings
Step 1.
In order to implement the BAdi one need to implement enhancement spot prior to that. This is the most complicated part, because despite we disabled internality flag the SAP-namespaced enhancements must be stored only in SAP-namespaced objects. By SAP namespace I mean non-Z, non-Y and non-T (Test). This means to implement this enhancement, besides modifying the enhancement definition, one need to create, for example, CTS_ES_TADIR named enh.impl., and save it to non-Z package, which you also need to create. Your enhancement implementations selector should look somehow like this
On the above screen only the second will work, all the rest Z will not.
Every non-Z object need Object Access Key, remember? Too bad. But just to show the proof-of-concept, I will proceed.
Step 2. After you created the enh. implementation in SAP-namespace it will propose you to create the BAdi implementation. The same principle applies here: only SAP-namespaced container for SAP-namespaced objects, hence CTS_TADIR_SUBSCREEN should have implementing class for example CL_TADIR_SUBSCREEN. During the creation of enhancement you will see many warnings
but finally you should have something like this, where all system-named objects are created and the enhancement/BAdi is activated.
Step 3. In order to get the BAdi working we need to enable this subscreen processing
during the playing with enhancement I found out that BAdi class is not being triggered standalone, without screen events not enhanced, so to make it work you need to touch a screen enhancement for screen 100
If you do not wanna modify screen elements logic, just put the dummy enhancement in SHOW_TADIR dialog module in the end of the include LSTRDO18
PROCESS BEFORE OUTPUT.
MODULE SHOW_TADIR. "<-- create the dummy enhancement here
CALL SUBSCREEN subs_info INCLUDING gv_badi_prog gv_badi_dynnr.
for example declaration statement like I did
Step 4. Activate your created BAdi class and put the necessary logic there. I wasn't able to trigger method GET_DATA_FROM_SCREEN, but PUT_DATA_TO_SCREEN worked fine
If we put this simple processing for your requirement
METHOD cts_if_tadir_subscreen~get_data_from_screen.
IF object_data-l_mstlang <> 'E'.
MESSAGE 'Objects in non-English languages are not allowed!' TYPE 'A'.
ENDIF.
ENDMETHOD.
it will not allow creating objects in languages other than English.
The check in method get_data_from_screen is being done before showing the screen so language is determined from system logon settings. If to play more with this BAdi, I suppose the method GET_DATA_FROM_SCREEN can also be enabled, which will make it possible to check user input, i.e. the case when the user gonna change the default language.
Is there a way to add Validation to a property on my VM "dynamically" (i.e. sometime after I register the initial rules on the VM)?
Currently, I'm registering the rules in the constructor of the VM, then a little while later, after the user has entered a bunch of data, I need to show a new field (using if.bind) and want to add validation depending on the result of a web api call..
Wondering if there's an API for this that I've missed?
You can achieve it without dynamically adding rule but instead you can use satisfiesRule and when, see it here in section Conditional Validation. satisfiesRule will only evaluated if the property that attached to it is already pass.
when will only evaluated the rule if the condition is true.
Additional link.
If you're using bootstrap, you can find this useful.
First, thanks for any advice. I am new to all of this and apologize for any obvious blunders.
Second, the question:
In an interface for entering clients that often possess a number of roles, it seemed efficient to create a set of inputs which possessed both visual characteristics and associated data binding based simply on the inputs name.
For example, inquirerfirstname would be any caller or emailer who contacted our company.
The name would dictate a label, placeholder, and the location in firebase where the data would be stored.
The single name could be used--I thought--with a relational table (state machine or series of nested ifs) to define the properties of the input and change its outward appearance and inner bindings through property manipulation.
I created a set of nested iffs, and console logged the property changes in the inputs, but their representation in the host element (a collection of inputs that generated messages to clients as well as messages to sales staff) remained unaffected.
I attempted using the ready callback. I forced the state change with a button.
I was unable to use the var name = new MyInput( name). I believe using this method would be most effective but am unsure how to "stamp" the JavaScript into a heavyweight stamped parent element.
An example of a more complicated and dynamic use of a constructor and a factory implementation that can read database (J-son) objects and respond to generate HTML elements would be awesome.
In vanilla a for each would seem to do the trick but definitions and structure as well as binding would not be organic--read it might be easier just to HTML stamp the inputs in polymer by hand.
I would be really greatful for any help. I have looked for a week and failed to find one example that took data binding, physical appearance, attribute swapping, property binding and object reading into account.
I guess it's a lot, but each piece independently (save the use of the constructor) I think I get.
Thanks again.
Jason
Ps: I am aware that the stamping of the element seems to preclude dynamic property attribute and binding assignments. I was hoping a compute attribute mixed with a factoryimpl would be an option (With a nice example).
Currently I'm using trial version of RFT for PowerBuilder v12.5 application. During recording when we save one windows information it generate a string (unique auto generated) for variable and use it for reference to store all other information from other windows and tabs . Currently RFT use this in Object Map for reference and when we playback the script, it fails as value of the variable changes from recorded value. I am unable to change recognition properties so that during playback it does not match above variable ‘Business Partner ID’.
I need to know how I can change the recognition property so that during playblack RFT skip the matching of this value or how can I make this dynamic so that whenever during playback RFT save the information it get the unique value each time.
Your prompt response will really help me a lot, thank you in advance. In case any other details required, do let me know.
Regards,
Atif Abbas
In cases where recognition properties of an object are dynamic , there are two approaches two handle them:
Convert the dynamic property value to a regular expression.
Convert the object itself to a dynamic test object.
You can find detail information on converting the property value to a regular expression in the below link.
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/rtnlhelp/v6r0m0/index.jsp?topic=%2Fcom.rational.test.ft.help%2FReplExactMatchPropwithPattern.htm
Also there is a nice blog on object map of RFT:
http://rftobjectmap.blogspot.in/
If you want to find objects with changing properties you can consider to use the TestObject.find method. This allows you to access test objects without even having them in the object map. A good introduction to the find method is provided by IBM developerWorks: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/06/0711_nowacki_nodwell/.