I'm learning Griffon framework and I have the following problem:
mvcGroupInit isn't invoked when I call buildMVCGroup(...) - should I explicitly invoke it after this method call? (What about model and view injection then?)
My app:
in view ('main app' mvc):
widget(buildMVCGroup([base:new MyClass(), queue:model.queue],
"button", "1").view.buttonView)
in ButtonController (never invoked):
void mvcGroupInit(Map args) {
println "############MVCGroupInit Button"
// this method is called after model and view are injected
model.base = args.base
model.queue = args.queue
}
Or please suggest how I should build and init MVC groups?
EDIT: Griffon 0.9.4
That method should be called whenever a group is instantiated. If it's not happening then that's likely a bug introduced in 0.9.4. Have you tried the latest 0.9.5-rc1 release?
Actually I had to reinstall my whole system, and when I run my code now - it works (though println isn't printing to the console in eclipse from mvcGroupInit).
Maybe it was caching problem.
Related
I am attempting to update a Prism 8.1 app to use Shiny v2.
In trying to turn one of my services into a Job I keep getting a container resolution error (using Unity). I am not sure what the pattern is for registering platform implementations of services. The Job has a service that is from my platform project but at the time the services.RegisterJob() is called I guess the platform initializer has not run.
Can someone post an example of how you are supposed to register platform implementations with Shiny?
Well, I'm not sure if this is the intended design but I solved the platform services this way.
I added a constructor parameter to my ShinyStartup like this:
public Startup(IPlatformInitializer platformInitializer) : base(PrismContainerExtension.Current)
{
_platformInitializer = platformInitializer;
}
and then in my AppDelegate I used this:
Shiny.ShinyHost.Init(new Shiny.ApplePlatform(), new Startup(new iOSInitializer()));
Where iOSInitializer is my Prism IPlatformInitializer.
Then in Startup I added:
protected override void RegisterServices(IContainerRegistry containerRegistry)
{
_platformInitializer.RegisterTypes(containerRegistry);
...
}
As far as the IJob not resolving dependencies when using RegisterJob, I moved job registration to App.OnStart using IJobManager.Register and it works. Also not sure if this is the intended design.
I did all my container wire up before calling RegisterJob and it still failed to resolve so there must be something under the covers that is happening in the Prism+Shiny world.
I have one issue with my application which is solved using refresh() method of TableView. But this method is available since JavaFX 8u60. Our production environment uses build version prior to that. Can anyone let me know which method should I use in prior versions?
I was able to fix the issue by using the body of refresh() method. I was unable to use refresh() method in prior versions to mentioned version as the method was private. So I used the body of refresh() instead of refresh().
table.getProperties().put(TableViewSkinBase.RECREATE, Boolean.TRUE);
I am not sure how to use Dependency Injection on Xamarin Android project solution. Currently my Android solution holds a reference to another class library solution. I have used Unity on my service layer and registered the container via WebApiConfig.cs.
My question is, how do i go about using Unity on Android side in order to run on start up, would be grateful if code was included. I dont want to new-up the container through main activity of Android. I want the container to register behind the process i.e. AppStart or Global asax where it does it for you for MVC apps. Is there a way to do it for Android? Also I noticed on Main Activity I am unable to create constructor. I guess this isnt possible but how do I go about holding object reference to my Class Library solution ? example that i attempted to do:
private IExample _ex;
MainActivity(IExample ex){
_ex = ex; //depedency Injection rather than newing it up
}
public void DoSomething(){
_ex.HelloWorld();
}
Is there a way to do it via Attribute ? Also for each of my layer do I need to install and create container in order to resolve current solution dependency ? or can I use container from android which would resolve all dependency in each layer as DDD architecture goes from outer to inner ?
In terms of setting up DI at startup you can create a custom Application implementation like so:
// Must include this attribute so that Android knows we want to use this as our Application implementation
[Application(Icon = "#drawable/Icon", Label = "#string/ApplicationName")]
public class MyApplication : Application
{
public override void OnCreate()
{
base.OnCreate();
// Do your DI initialization/registration here
}
}
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by not being able to create a constructor on the main activity. You can create constructors for any activity you feel like. You don't always see it though because people tend to put their initialization logic in OnCreate.
I am creating a new plugin containing CustomService which is intended to replace an existing service from an existing plugin. Following the pattern found in custom security implementations and shown here, I've added the configuration to the resources.groovy, oldService(path.to.new.CustomService). I've also tried adding all injected classes into the closure for this service.
(Actual service names are RegistrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService and NewRegistrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService in code block)
I dont want the original application code to have any reference to the new plugin. However, BuildConfig at the application level will require plugin.location entry. My resource.groovy mods are in the new plugin. I have not had success in this endeavor. Am I modifying the wrong resources.groovy? If this change is required in the original application code, I've lost the ability to leave the original code unaltered. I'm not extending the original Service nor using override annotation. My intent is to replace the service (Spring bean) on start-up. The new plugin has a dependency on the old plugin in an attempt to manage order of operations in loading these classes.
Does it matter that the old service is previously injected in a controller? this would require me to override the controller in the new plugin in the same fashion and inject the correct service for desired behavior?
I've found documentation showing that within a plugin, the resources.groovy will be ignored. Also, building the resources.groovy into a war is problematic. I have not found a solution. I'm getting no error that I can share, just that the desired behavior is missing; the original service is handling the requests.
//was resource.groovy - now renamed to serviceOverRide.groovy - still located in \grails-app\conf\spring of plugin
//tried this with and without the BeanBuilder. Theory: I'm missing the autowire somehow
import org.springframework.context.ApplicationContext
import grails.spring.BeanBuilder
def bb = new BeanBuilder()
bb.beans {
registrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService(path.to.services.registration.NewRegistrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService) { bean ->
bean.autowire = true
registrationRestrictionCompositeService = ref("registrationRestrictionCompositeService")
registrationPersonTermVerificationService = ref("registrationPersonTermVerificationService")
}
classRegistrationController(path.to.services.registration.ClassRegistrationController) { bean ->
bean.autowire = true
selfServiceLookupService = ref("selfServiceLookupService")
registrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService = ref("registrationPersonRegistrationCompositeService")
}
}
ApplicationContext appContext = bb.createApplicationContext()
Additional information: Added the following lines to the PluginGrailsPlugin.groovy. The original service is still handling these requests
def dependsOn = ['appPersonRegistration': '1.0.20 > *']
List loadAfter = ['appPersonRegistration']
def doWithSpring = {
registrationPersonCourseRegistrationCompositeService(path.to.new.registration.TccRegistrationPersonCourseRegistrationCompositeService)
}
def doWithApplicationContext = { applicationContext ->
SecurityContextHolder.setStrategyName(SecurityContextHolder.MODE_INHERITABLETHREADLOCAL)
DefaultListableBeanFactory beanFactory = (DefaultListableBeanFactory) applicationContext.getBeanFactory()
beanFactory.registerBeanDefinition("registrationPersonCourseRegistrationCompositeService", BeanDefinitionBuilder.rootBeanDefinition(TccRegistrationPersonCourseRegistrationCompositeService.class.getName()).getBeanDefinition())
}
I highly recommend you read the section of the documentation on Plugins. The reason why I recommend this is because plugins:
Do not include, or make use of resources.groovy
Provide a means through doWithSpring to effect the spring application
Following the information in the documentation you should have no issue overriding the service in the application context.
You must implement your changes to the application context using doWithSpring this is the key to solving your issues.
In this implementation, I had a utility method in a service for which I was attempting to provide an override. Problem is, the Aspect works as a proxy and must override a method that is called directly from another class. In my classRegistrationController, I was calling service processRegistration() which in turn called applyRules(). Example-only method names used. Since the service was calling its own utility, there was no opportunity for the proxy/wrapper to circumvent the call to applyRules(). Once this was discovered, I refactored the code in this fashion: Controller calls processRegistration as it always had. After returning, another call is made to the service, processLocalRules(). The new method is an empty placeholder intended to be overridden by the client's custom logic. The plugin with Aspect works now using resources.groovy. I prefer the doWithSpring as Joshua explained for this reason: my intent to get the plugin to work without modification to the original app-config; otherwise resource.groovy is a valid approach. Upvoting Joshua's answer as it does satisfy the requirement and is cleaner. Thanks!
this question Ninject Dependency Injection in MVC3 - Outside of a Controller is close to what I'm experiencing, but not quite.
I have an ASP.NET MVC3 site using Ninject 3 and it works wonderfully with constructor injection. All my dependencies are resolved, including those that pass in HttpContext.Current.
My issue is that in global.asax, I kick off a TaskManager class that periodically performs some tasks on a timer. Inside the TaskManager class, I don't have controllers, so if I need access to one of my dependencies (like my error logging service), I use a static wrapper class that has access to the kernel object:
var logger = MyContainer.Get<ILoggingService>();
logger.Error("error doing something...", ex);
The .Get method simply performs a kernel.Get call resolve my dependency. Works great every time I use this method on my other dependencies. However, ILoggingService has a dependency called MyWebHelper that is injected via it's constructor and includes HttpContext in it's constructor.
public class DefaultLogger : ILoggingService
{
public DefaultLogger(IRepository<Log> logRepository, IWebHelper webHelper)
{
_logRepository = logRepository;
_webHelper = webHelper;
}
}
public class MyWebHelper : IWebHelper
{
public MyWebHelper(HttpContext httpContext)
{
_httpContext = httpContext;
}
}
In the rest of my web site, this all works just fine because all the dependencies are injected into my MVC controllers. But what doesn't work is if I manually call my static wrapper class to get my dependencies that way. I get the error:
Error activating HttpContext using binding from HttpContext to method
Provider returned null.
So, it's not giving me an HttpContext like it does throughout the rest of my MVC application. I hope this makes sense, I'm not a ninject expert yet, but I'm trying...
My issue is that in global.asax, I kick off a TaskManager class that
periodically performs some tasks on a timer.
That's a bad idea as Phil Haack explains in details. Don't do this in your web application. Those recurring tasks should be done in a separate application (Windows Service or some console application which is scheduled to run at regular intervals).
Now the thing is that you are running background threads. Those background threads run outside of any user HTTP request and as a consequence HttpContext.Current is obviously null inside them. So even if you don't follow Phil Haack's advice and continue running background tasks in your ASP.NET application you will have to rearchitecture your method so that it no longer depends on any HttpContext because there's no such thing in those background threads.