I'm developing my own generator with Yeoman. When I try to copy some files, nothing happens. No error, the process continues until it reach the end, but no files are copied. The generator has a /templates dir with a bunch of html files, each file has a few html lines, at the moment quite simple stuff.
This is my copy method:
copyMainFiles: function(){
console.log('copyMainFiles dir:' + process.cwd() + '+++++');
console.log('file exists? '+fs.existsSync('_footer.html') );
this.copy("_footer.html", "app/footer.html");
console.log('footer copied');
this.copy("_gruntfile.js", "Gruntfile.js");
console.log('gruntfile copied');
this.copy("_package.json", "package.json");
console.log('package copied');
this.copy("_main.css", "app/css/main.css");
console.log('main.css copied');
var context = {
site_name: this.appName
};
console.log('all files copied');
//template method makes the replacement and then copy
this.template("_header.html", "app/header.html", context);
console.log('header template processed');
},
this is the console output:
$ yo trx
method 1 just ran
method 2 just ran
? What is your app's name ?
Kosheen
? Would you like to generate a demo section ? Yes
all dirs created
copyMainFiles dir:C:\cygwin\Applications\MAMP\htdocs\prueba-trx+++++
file exists? false
footer copied
gruntfile copied
package copied
main.css copied
all files copied
header template processed
running npm
and that's it. Never returns to system prompt.
Besides the fact that fs.existsSync returns false (the file exists: htdocs\generator-trx\generators\app\templates_footer.html ), if I try to copy a non-existent file I get the typical error.
Folders are created previously with no issue. There's a .yo_rc.json file with {} in the root of the destination folder. The Yeoman version is 1.4.8, working on Windows 7.
Is copy() the proper way to do this or is no longer valid? How can I copy a simple file in this scenario?
Beside the fact of I was using deprecated methods, the proper way to achive this task is as follow:
this.fs.copy(
this.templatePath('_bower.json'),
this.destinationPath('bower.json')
);
Not sure what your issue is, but you should read the Yeoman official documentation on how to handle files: http://yeoman.io/authoring/file-system.html
You're using old and deprecated methods.
Related
Are these two statements equivalent?
const deviceModule = require('..').device;
const deviceModule = require('../device');
I thought require needed a module (with our without path) as the parameter. How is it that a directory can be provided and what does the .device do?
Thanks to anyone who can help me understand node.js and javascript better.
require('..').device requires index.js from the parent directory, and then gets device from that file.
So if you had the following structure:
- index.js
- /foo
- - bar.js
With index.js having the following:
module.exports = {
device: "baz"
};
Then require("..").device in bar.js would give you "baz".
Here is the specification for loading a directory:
LOAD_AS_DIRECTORY(X)
1. If X/package.json is a file,
a. Parse X/package.json, and look for "main" field.
b. let M = X + (json main field)
c. LOAD_AS_FILE(M)
2. If X/index.js is a file, load X/index.js as JavaScript text. STOP
3. If X/index.json is a file, parse X/index.json to a JavaScript object. STOP
4. If X/index.node is a file, load X/index.node as binary addon. STOP
So in your example, it will:
look for package.json and get the main property, and then load that if it exists
If step 1 does not exist, it will load index.js if it exists
If step 2 does not exist, it will load index.json if it exists
If step 4 does not exist, it will load index.node if it exists
You can use module require-file-directory.
1- Helps to require all the files only with name. No need to give absolute path of files.
2- Multiple files at a time.
I'm trying to add unit testing for JavaScript into my web site. I use VS2013 and my project is an ASP.NET web site.
Based on recommendations (http://www.rhyous.com/2013/02/20/creating-a-qunit-test-project-in-visual-studio-2010/) I've done so far:
Created new ASP.NET app
Imported QUnit (using NuGet)
Into "Scripts" added links to js-file in my original web site (files PlayerSkill.js - containts PlayerSkill class and trainings.js - contains Trainer and some other classes)
Created new folder "TestScripts"
Added TrainingTests.js file
Wrote simple test:
test( "Trainer should have non-empty group", function () {
var group = "group";
var trainer = new Trainer(123, "Name123", group, 123);
EQUAL(trainer.getTrainerGroup(), group);
});
Notice: my trainings.js file among others contains
function Trainer(id, name, group, level) {
...
var _group = group;
this.getTrainerGroup = function () { return _group ; }
};
When I execute my test I see error: Trainer is not defined.
It looks like reference to my class is not recognized. I feel like linking file is not enough, but what did I miss?
Please help add reference to the original file with class and run unit test.
Thank you.
P.S. Question 2: Can I add reference to 2 files (my unit test will require one more class which is in another file)? How?
You should add all the relevant logic of your application to your unit testing file so they all execute before you run your tests
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="utf-8">
<title>QUnit Test Results</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" href="/Content/qunit.css">
</head>
<body>
<div id="qunit"></div>
<div id="qunit-fixture"></div>
<script src="/Scripts/qunit.js"></script>
<script src="/Scripts/PlayerSkill.js"></script>
<script src="/Scripts/trainings.js"></script>
<script src="/TestScripts/TrainingTests.js"></script>
</body>
</html>
You should not use linked files because they will not exist physically in the script folder.
If you really want to use them you should let the Visual Studio intellisense resolve the physical path of the file like this.
Type the script tag <script src=""></script>
Place the cursor inside the quotes in the src attribute and press CTRL + SPACE
Search your files and let the resolved path untouched
If your project location changes you must update the linked files and also the script references.
{Edit1}
Solution 2:
You could also use an MVC Controller and a Razor View to create your unit testing page and the linked files will work as expected with the only issue that you will have an extra controller in your project but this is not bad at all if for example you want to test the loading of content using ajax that is by default blocked by the browser if they are run from a local file.
Solution 3:
You can also setup a new MVC project just for your javascript unit testing just as you usually setup a new project for any server side code and this will help to prevent your testing to interfere with your production code
{Edit 2}
Solution 4:
As part of the javascript ecosystem you could use grunt or gulp to automate the copy of your scripts from anywhere to your project before running the tests. You could write a gulpfile.js like this
var sourcefiles = [/*you project file paths*/];
gulp.task('default', function () {
return gulp.src(sourcefiles).pipe(gulp.dest('Scripts'));
});
And then run it opening a console and running the command gulp or gulp default
Looks like trainings.js is not defined when calling TrainingTests.js . See this question for more details regarding why this happens! Once that is fixed it does work. And yes similar to trainings.js you can have any number of files in any folder as long as you reference them properly. I have created a sample fiddle accessible # http://plnkr.co/edit/PnqVebOzmPpGu7x2qWLs?p=preview
<body>
<div id="qunit"></div>
<div id="qunit-fixture"></div>
<script src="http://code.jquery.com/qunit/qunit-1.18.0.js"></script>
<script src="trainings.js"></script>
<script src="TrainingTests.js"></script>
</body>
In my case I wanted to run my tests from within my ASP.NET web application, and also on a CI server. In addition to the other information here I needed the following, otherwise I experienced the same error as the OP on my CI server:
Add one or more require() calls to test scripts.
Set the NODE_PATH environment variable to the root of my application.
Example of require()
Within my test scripts I include a requires block, the conditional allows me to use this script from a web browser without needing to adopt a third-party equivalent such as requirejs (which is convenient.)
if (typeof(require) !== 'undefined') {
require('lib/3rdparty/dist/3p.js');
require('js/my.js');
require('js/app.js');
}
Example of setting NODE_PATH
Below, 'wwwroot' is the path of where /lib/ and other application files are located. My test files are located within /tests/.
Using bash
#!/bin/bash
cd 'wwwroot'
export NODE_PATH=`pwd`
qunit tests
Using powershell
#!/usr/bin/pwsh
cd 'wwwroot'
$env:NODE_PATH=(pwd)
qunit tests
This allowed me to run tests both within my ASP.NET web application, and also from a CI server using a script.
HTH.
If you're wondering how to make your tests see your code when running from command line (not from browser!), here is a bit expanded version of Shaun Wilson's answer (which doesn't work out-of-the-box, but contains a good idea where to start)
Having following structure:
project
│ index.js <--- Your script with logic
└───test
tests.html <--- QUnit tests included in standard HTML page for "running" locally
tests.js <--- QUnit test code
And let's imagine that in your index.js you have following:
function doSomething(arg) {
// do smth
return arg;
}
And the test code in tests.js (not that it can be the whole content of the file - you don't need anything else to work):
QUnit.test( "test something", function( assert ) {
assert.ok(doSomething(true));
});
Running from command line
To make your code accessible from the tests you need to add two things to the scripts.
First is to explicitly "import" your script from tests. Since JS doesn't have sunch a functionality out-of-the box, we'll need to use require coming from NPM. And to keep our tests working from HTML (when you run it from browser, require is undefined) add simple check:
// Add this in the beginning of tests.js
// Use "require" only if run from command line
if (typeof(require) !== 'undefined') {
// It's important to define it with the very same name in order to have both browser and CLI runs working with the same test code
doSomething = require('../index.js').doSomething;
}
But if index.js does not expose anything, nothing will be accessible. So it's required to expose functions you want to test explicitly (read more about exports). Add this to index.js:
//This goes to the very bottom of index.js
if (typeof module !== 'undefined' && module.exports) {
exports.doSomething = doSomething;
}
When it's done, just type
qunit
And the output should be like
TAP version 13
ok 1 Testing index.js > returnTrue returns true
1..1
# pass 1
# skip 0
# todo 0
# fail 0
Well, due to help of two answers I did localize that problem indeed was in inability of VS to copy needed file into test project.
This can be probably resolved by multiple ways, I found one, idea copied from: http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/loadjavascriptcss.shtml
Solution is simple: add tag dynamically
In order to achieve this, I've added the following code into tag:
<script>
var fileref = document.createElement('script');
fileref.setAttribute("type", "text/javascript");
var path = 'path'; // here is an absolute address to JS-file on my web site
fileref.setAttribute("src", path);
document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(fileref);
loadjscssfile(, "js") //dynamically load and add this .js file
</script>
And moved my tests into (required also reference to jquery before)
$(document).ready(function () {
QUnit.test("Test #1 description", function () { ... });
});
Similar approach also works for pure test files.
I tried to create a gulpfile.js for my personal website project. I've never done this before but with a little 'trial and error' it now works in an acceptable way.
The only thing that doesn't work even after 1000 modifications is simple copying files and folders.
var files = {
data_src : [
'./files.json',
'data/**/*.*'
],
distribution_dest : '_distribution'
};
gulp.task('copy-data', function() {
gulp.src(files.data_src, { base: './' })
.pipe(gulp.dest(files.distribution_dest))
.pipe(notify({message: 'Data copied for distribution!'}));
});
This should copy all sub-folders and files to the gulp.dest. But it copies only half of them, some folders will be ignored even if I change their names etc. (no special characters, same subfolder structure as the once that got copied correctly ...) - nothing worked. I just can't see any pattern in this.
There is no error message while running gulp. Nothing that would help me find the error.
Why are some folders or files excluded from copying?
I use base to keep the folder / sub-folder structure; tried with and without 'base' -> no effects on the copying process.
I also changed the position of the 'copy-data' task in the run-list. Actually it's the first task to run. There seems to be no change in behavior no matter if it's the first or the last one.
gulp.task('default', function() {
gulp.run('copy-data', 'custom-sass', 'framework-sass', 'custom-js', 'framework-js', 'replace-tags', 'browser-sync');
... some watches ...
});
The structure of the data folder looks like these:
./data
|-doc
|---content
|---template
|-img
|---chart
|---icon
|---logo
|---pattern
|---people
|---photo
|---symbol
|-----brandklassen
|-----brandschutzzeichen
|-----gebotszeichen
|-----gefahrensymbole
|-----rettungszeichen
|-----verbotszeichen
|-----verkehrsrechtzeichen
|-----warnzeichen
|---wallpaper
/data/doc and all subfolders are ok.
/data/img/chart to /data/img/people are also ok.
Within /data/img/photo only 14 out of 21 images are copied.
/data/img/symbol with sub-folders and /data/img/wallpaper were ignored completely.
SOLVED IT MYSELF! The problem was caused by async operating tasks. Adding a return forced gulp to complete the copying process before continuing!
gulp.task('copy-data', function() {
return gulp.src(files.data_src, { base: './' })
.pipe(gulp.dest(files.distribution_dest))
.pipe(notify({message: 'Data copied for distribution!'}))
});
Now all images will be copied!
I have a web app that runs in node. All the (client) Javascript/CSS files are not minified at the moment to make it easier to debug.
When I am going into production, I would like to minify these scripts. It would be nice to have something like:
node app.js -production
How do I serve the minified version of my scripts without changing the script tags in my html files? There should be something like: if I am in production, use these 2 minified(combined) scripts, else use all my unminified scripts..
Is this possible? Maybe I am thinking too complicated?
You might be interested in Piler. It's a Node.js module that delivers all the JavaScript (and CSS) files you specify as usual when in debug mode, but concatenated and minified when in production mode.
As a special feature, you can force CSS updates via Socket.io in real-time to appear in your browser (called "CSS Live Updated" in Piler), which is quite awesome :-).
The trick is that inside your template you only have placeholders for the script and link elements, and Piler renders these elements at runtime - as single elements in debug mode, and as a dynamically generated single element in production mode.
This way you can forget about creating concatenated and minified versions of your assets manually or using a build tool, it's just there at runtime, but you always have the separated, full versions when developing and debugging.
you could use 2 separate locations for your static files
Here's some express code:
if (process.env.MODE === "production") {
app.use(express['static'](__dirname + '/min'));
} else {
app.use(express['static'](__dirname + '/normal'));
}
and start node with
MODE=production node app.js
Furthermore, if you don't want to duplicate all your files, you could take advantage of the fact that express static router stops at the first file, and do something like this instead:
if (process.env.MODE === "production") {
app.use(express['static'](__dirname + '/min')); // if minized version exists, serves it
}
app.use(express['static'](__dirname + '/normal')); // fallback to regular files
Using the same name for minimized or not is going to cause problem with browser caching, though.
I want to share my final solution with you guys.
I use JSHTML for Express (enter link description here)
In my main node file I use a special route:
app.get('/**:type(html)', function (req, res, next) {
var renderingUrl = req.url.substring(1, req.url.lastIndexOf("."));
//TODO: Find a better solution
try{
var assetUrl = req.url.substring(req.url.lastIndexOf("/") + 1, req.url.lastIndexOf("."));
var assets = config.getResourceBundle(assetUrl);
assets.production = config.getEnviroment() === "production";
res.locals(assets);
res.render(renderingUrl);
}catch(e){
res.redirect("/");
}
});
As you can see, I get my assets from config.getResourceBundle. This is a simply function:
exports.getResourceBundle = function(identifier){
switch(enviroment){
case "development":
return devConfig.getResourceBundle(identifier);
case "production":
return prodConfig.getResourceBundle(identifier);
default:
return devConfig.getResourceBundle(identifier);
}
}
And finally an example for an asset file collection is here:
exports.getResourceBundle = function (identifier) {
return resourceBundle[identifier];
};
resourceBundle = {
index:{
cssFiles:[
"resources/dev/css/login.css",
"resources/dev/css/logonDlg.css",
"resources/dev/css/footer.css"
],
jsFiles:[
"resources/dev/js/lib/jquery/jquery.183.js",
"resources/dev/js/utilities.js",
"resources/dev/js/lib/crypto.3.1.2.js"
]
},
register:{
cssFiles:[
"resources/dev/css/login.css",
"resources/dev/css/modalDialog.css",
"resources/dev/css/footer.css"
],
jsFiles:[
"resources/dev/js/lib/jquery/jquery.183.js",
"resources/dev/js/utilities.js",
"resources/dev/js/lib/crypto.3.1.2.js",
"resources/dev/js/lib/jquery.simplemodal.js",
"resources/dev/js/xfiles.register.js"
]
}
(...)
I have 2 folders. dev / prod. grunt will copy the minified files into prod/.. and deletes the files from dev/...
And if the NODE_ENV variable is set to production, I will ship the minified versions of my scripts/css.
I think this is the most elegant solution at the moment.
There are build tool plugins for you, may help you gracefully solve this problem:
For Gulp:
https://www.npmjs.org/package/gulp-useref/
For Grunt:
https://github.com/pajtai/grunt-useref
Another Node.js module which could be relevant is connect-cachify.
It doesn't seem to do the actual minification for you, but it does let you serve the minified version in production, or all the original scripts in development, without changing the templates (thanks to cachify_js and cachify_css).
Seems it's not as feature-rich as Piler, but probably a bit simpler, and should meet all the requirements mentioned in the question.
I was following along to this post by Rebecca Murphey: http://blog.rebeccamurphey.com/scaffolding-a-buildable-dojo-application
I was substituting her file structure with my own.
Running the normal version of the scripts works fine, but the moment I compile them using the build tool, the script errors.
It's very likely a small problem with how the files are referenced via my Profile.js script but maybe someone here can help me get the settings correct before running the build tool so the compiled files will work as they should.
My file structure is as follows...
/www
/Assets
/Scripts
/Classes
build.sh
Init.js
Load.js
Profile.js
/Dojo
Dojo.js
/dojo-sdk
index.html
My index.html file has the following code...
<script>
var djConfig = {
modulePaths : {
'Integralist' : '../Classes'
}
};
</script>
<script src="Assets/Scripts/Dojo/Dojo.js"></script>
<script>
dojo.require('Integralist.Init');
</script>
...and the Init.js file has the following code...
dojo.provide('Integralist.Init');
dojo.require('Integralist.Load');
dojo.declare('MyApp', null, {
constructor: function(config) {
this.version = config.version || '1.0';
this.author = config.author || 'Unknown';
}
});
var myapp = new MyApp({
author: 'Mark McDonnell'
});
alert(myapp.author);
alert(myapp.version);
...lastly, the Load.js file has nothing in it but this...
dojo.provide('Integralist.Load');
alert('I\'m the Load.js file');
...and this all runs fine. When I load index.html I get 3 alert messages, brilliant.
The problem occurs when I try to run the build tool.
Via Mac OSX i locate the /Classes/ directory and run 'sh build.sh' and the build.sh file within the /Classes/ directory consists of the following code...
cd ../../../dojo-sdk/util/buildscripts
./build.sh profileFile=../../../Assets/Scripts/Classes/Profile.js releaseDir=../../../Assets/Scripts/Release
...now, after running the build tool I have a new /Release/ directory created within my /Scripts/ directory, this /Release/ directory consists of...
/www
/Assets
/Scripts
/Release
/Integralist
/Classes
Init.js
Init.js.uncompressed.js
/dojo
--loads of dojo related files--
...I then created a separate index file called index-release-version.html and changed the script code as suggested by the article, so it looks like this...
<script src="Assets/Scripts/Release/Integralist/dojo/dojo.js"></script>
<script>
dojo.require('Integralist.Init');
</script>
...from here I get the following error...
Failed to load resource: the server responded with a status of 404 (Not Found)
Uncaught Error: Could not load 'Integralist.Init'; last tried '../Integralist/Init.js'
...and just for reference my Profile.js file that is used by the build tool consists of the following (and it's here I think the problem may be)...
dependencies = {
stripConsole : 'all',
action : 'clean,release',
optimize : 'shrinksafe',
releaseName : 'Integralist',
localeList : 'en-gb',
layers: [
{
name: "../Classes/Init.js",
resourceName : "Integralist.Init",
dependencies: [
"Integralist.Init"
]
}
],
prefixes: [
[ "Integralist", "../Classes" ]
]
}
Any help really appreciated as I desperately want to get my head around how Dojo works :-)
Thanks!
M.
I'd suggest working from the repo I linked to from my blog post (http://github.com/rmurphey/dojo-scaffold) -- I double-checked that it's definitely working :) -- and make changes to it until your changes break something, rather than trying to create your own structure right off the bat.
At a glance, I'm not 100% clear why you've got a Dojo.js file inside your directory structure, (is this the base Dojo lib or something else?), but the rest of Dojo is located elsewhere. If you use the structure I proposed, you can safely remove the djConfig declaration when using the built files, but as Dan mentioned, you may need to keep it if you're using a different configuration.
Do you have that djConfig variable in your index-release-version.html? It looks like Dojo is trying to find init.js at ../Integralist/Init.js, but you somehow need to tell it to look in ../Classes/Init.js
This is what your modulePaths : {'Integralist' : '../Classes'} was doing in your Index.html