As title, can auto-generated Peer classes be deleted in Propel? I don't know what's their purpose and i don't need them now - i'm fine using custom queries and i'm totally happy with Propel.
Deleting them would make my project a bit more clean. Thanks.
No you cannot, it's part of Propel, and contains useful (maybe) constants.
Propel2 will remove these Peer classes, but at the moment, you cannot.
Related
I recently downloaded a Single Page Web Application (Angular) from https://aspnetboilerplate.com/Templates using 3.x target version.
I just simply added a few entities and then started to follow the steps on this page https://aspnetboilerplate.com/Pages/Documents/Application-Services
Things do work well for me to Get, List, Update, and Delete entities when my app service class is just inheriting AsyncCrudAppService<Entities.PhoneBook, PhoneBookDto, long, GetAllPhoneBooksInput>, however when it is inheriting AsyncCrudAppService<Entities.PhoneBook, PhoneBookDto, long, GetAllPhoneBooksInput, CreatePhoneBookInput, and UpdatePhoneBookInput> the swagger definition will no longer load.
GitHub Repo: https://github.com/woodman231/MyPhoneBooks
(which currently does not work and will not load Swagger page).
I can get the swagger page to load by removing CreatePhoneBookInput and UpdatePhoneBookInput from
https://github.com/woodman231/MyPhoneBooks/blob/main/aspnet-core/src/MyPhoneBooks.Application/SimpleCrudAppServices/ISimplePhoneBookCrudAppService.cs#L9
and
https://github.com/woodman231/MyPhoneBooks/blob/main/aspnet-core/src/MyPhoneBooks.Application/SimpleCrudAppServices/SimplePhoneBookCrudAppService.cs#L14
However, again I am still unable to create entities using this default implementation. Any ideas?
I have cloned your repo and run it and I figured out the error, first as I tell you in comments I verified the text log, and it said the next:
System.InvalidOperationException: Can't use schemaId "$CreatePhoneBookInput" for type "$MyPhoneBooks.SimpleCrudAppServices.Dtos.CreatePhoneBookInput". The same schemaId is already used for type "$MyPhoneBooks.PhoneBooks.Dtos.CreatePhoneBookInput"
What happenig is that you have these two classes UpdatePhoneBookInput, CreatePhoneBookInput repeated in SanokeCrudAppServices\Dtos and PhoneBooks\Dtos
You have the classes in both folders with same exact name, and thats the problem, if you change the name in whatever place the swagger definition will load without errors, I have do it like this and everything works fine!
Change the name in one of the places, and all will be working fine
Personally I don't like to use a different Dto for Create and Update for me is easier to user just one Dto for all.
Ok I figured it out. I had also made a DIY AppService and some of the DTO Class Names associated with the DIY App Service clashed with the DTO Class Names associated with the Automated Service. It was acceptable in .NET since they were in different name spaces but once the swagger definition was configured I assume that there was multiple instances of the same DTO Defition. I checked the AbpLogs table but they didn't give me much details as to the specifics of the internal server error while loading the definition. It sure would have been useful to know that.
During the implementation of SAP note 2724847, some generic proxy objects are deleted:
I don't know what was the code they contained is there any way I could get them back or where I can find its code ?
I don't have much experience with proxy objects and don't fully understand the problem but apparently someone else deleted some ABAP views and the errors appeared.
I already checked the notes and I couldn't find the code inside the objects.
Here are the changes the note is supposed to do and the note is apparently successfully implemented:
And here are the changes better explained by the note :
I'm using the Check package to validate parameters passed to Meteor methods. And I'm using Audit argument checks to enforce this.
However, I've added another package, Meteor Tags and when I try to use methods from the Tags package, I get a server error "Exception while invoking method '/patterns/addTag' Error: Did not check() all arguments during call to '/patterns/addTag'".
I think I understand why this error happens - the method in the Tags package doesn't check its inputs, so Audit Argument Checks generates an error. But I can't find any way around this, apart from 1) don't enforce checking, or 2) hack the Tags package methods so they use check. Neither of these seems like a great option - checking server parameters is a good idea, and hacking a package is not very maintainable.
Does anybody know if there is any smart way to use 'Audit argument checks' with packages that provide new server methods? I have looked at the Check documents, and searched online, but I haven't found an answer.
I hope this question makes sense.
Using audit-argument-checks is like saying: "I want to be serious about the security of the methods in my app." It's global to all methods in your app's codebase, including the methods from your installed packages.
There is no way to specify which parts of the app get checked, as that would be the equivalent of saying: "I want to be serious about the security of the methods I've written, but I don't care about the security holes created by some pacakges" (which doesn't make a lot of sense).
Note to package authors
Check your method arguments. It's not hard, and it prevents this situation from happening. Frankly, a package without this basic security really shouldn't be installed in the first place.
What you should do
Unless you have a throwaway app, I wouldn't recommend removing audit-argument-checks. Instead I'd do the following (assuming the package really has something of value):
Open an issue on github and let the maintainer know what's up.
Fork the code, and add the required checks. Keep this version as a local package.
Submit a pull request for the changes.
If all goes well, your PR will be accepted and everyone can benefit from the change. In the worst case, you'll still have a local copy that you can use in your app.
I have created a document-based app that uses Core Data. I created the mac version first, and now that it's working properly, I am moving on to create an iOS version of it.
I just can't get my head around how to maximize code reuse between the iOS/mac versions, with respect to the Core data bit, since they don't use the same classes.
My document class that handles saving and such is a subclass of NSPersistentDocument. My intention is that a well-designed model class should work in both environments, especially since I don't do all that much fancy stuff with regards to Core data.
Now, since NSPersistentDocument isn't available in iOS, I hit a wall. I tried to get around this by using #if TARGET_OS_MAC and TARGET_OS_IPHONE and in that manner make it a subclass of UIManagedDocument in the iOS version. That obviously would have been convenient, but I can't seem to make it work like that. And it's really looks quite messy, since there are a lot of other stuff that has to be conditionalized as well.
I also tried building the classes atop of NSDocument/UIDocument instead, implementing the Core data hooks myself, but it also looks quite messy, leaving me thinking it's not the right way to go.
The question:
To me, it seems like a good idea to reuse the same document class between the iOS/mac versions, but maybe I'm being naive.
What's the best way to do this?
Should I forget about the code sharing and create a separate document class for the iOS version that emulates all the methods present in the mac version?
Am I right that the code you're wanting to share is model-related? I suggest refactoring that code to a separate object, which both an NSDocument and UIDocument contain (as rickster suggested above).
I use a DocumentRoot Core Data entity with its own NSManagedObject subclass, but if there are no properties you want to manage using Core Data, you can just subclass NSObject.
This may sound strange, but NSDocument and UIDocument are actually controller classes. (To be specific, they're part of the model-controller.) Their jobs are to load the model, set up windows, and save the model. If you need to provide an interface for higher-level access to model objects, it could be in a document root or model helper class instead.
Similarly NSPersistentDocument's job is to configure the managed object context and the persistent store and handle loading and saving. It doesn't necessarily need to provide a complete interface for accessing the model.
(Bringing this over from my comment.)
In general, the situation where you have two classes which must inherit from different superclasses but which also want to share a lot of code is composition. Put the shared code in a separate class; your NSDocument and UIDocument subclasses can each keep an instance of that class, and message it whenever they need to invoke that shared code. (Though as #noa mentions, you might want to consider whether all of that code belongs in your document class to begin with.)
Of course, then you might end up writing a bunch of methods that read like:
- (id)doSomething {
return [sharedController doSomething]
}
That can get to be a pain... so you might want to look into Objective-C's message forwarding system.
I have a Managed Object Context to which I add two different SQLite stores. I use Configurations in the Mananged Object Model to assign certain entities to one store and other entities to the other. The Configurations are called "UserDB" and "MainDB".
Everything works okay until I try to use automatic migration. After creating a new Managed Object Model version, and adding a new attribute to one of the entities in the UserDB Configuration, I get an exception when adding the old version store (for the UserDB related store) to the store coordinator: 'Model does not contain configuration 'UserDB'.' I can find no hits for this error on Google. Anyone out there using multiple stores with Configurations? Anyone have an idea what I might be doing wrong?
The stack looks like this:
objc_exception_throw
-[NSManagedObjectModel isConfiguration:compatibleWithStoreMetadata:]
-[NSStoreMigrationPolicy sourceModelForStoreAtURL:metadata:error:]
-[NSStoreMigrationPolicy(InternalMethods) _gatherDataAndPerformMigration:]
-[NSPersistentStoreCoordinator addPersistentStoreWithType:configuration:URL:options:error:]
-[MyAppDelegate persistentStoreCoordinator]
This looks like a bug with migration+configurations. I was able to work around the problem by going through the same motions and passing nil for configuration when calling addPersistentStoreWithType. The migration happens, and then I can make a new persistent store coordinator and add the stores again with the proper Configuration string arguments.
This is the second configuration related bug I've run into. Not a well tested feature apparently.
I had the same problem. The fact pattern was identical and the error message the same. It turned out, however, to be the result of my own mistake.
Let's say the old model was Blah.xcdatamodel and the new Blah 2.xcdatamodel. I had started making changes to Blah before realising my mistake and creating Blah 2. I then used my version control system (Git) to revert to the old Blah and then recreated Blah 2. Everything looked right. But I must have done something wrong in the reversion process, because when I thought to double check that Blah.xcdatamodel in my current project folder was really the same as Blah.xcdatamodel in the project folder I used to build the previous version of the app (fortunately I always keep a zipped archive of the project folder for each released version as I don't fully trust version control systems), I found that they were in fact different, albeit that they looked identical in XCode. The file size was different, for instance.
I substituted the old Blah into my current project folder, and lo and behold it all went perfectly, without any need for the workaround described by Ken.
I am not saying that Ken had necessarily made a similar mistake, but if you do encounter this message it is at least worth confirming that the model you are migrating from is REALLY the model that was used to create the data in question.