This issue was moved to a discussion.
You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →
Apex_CustomRule: Check existence of specific class / method name using count function #1919
Comments
|
Hi, on a first look there are two things that are wrong with your XPath expression:
//UserClass[count(/UserClassMethods[@Image="bulkApexTest"])=0]becomes //UserClass[count(./UserClass[@Image="bulkApexTest"])=0]Notice the nested expression starts with |
|
Thanks for your quick response Clement.
Since, I was not able to get the method names, I have created a nested class. Happy to create a method instead of class.
for e.g. I have method public AddSite_CX(ApexPages.StandardSetController controller) in the apex code. I can see this method in the abstract. But, I don't know how to get the method details under the UserClass
[cid:a3104aa1-b6cd-48fd-8e56-ad9c1921c2dc]
As you have seen the apex code earlier, I need further inputs from you
//UserClass returns 3 classes namely AddSite_CX, sWrapper and bulkApexTest
Now, I want to check whether we have a class (nested) under AddSite_CX. I have used the following as you suggested.
//UserClass[count(./UserClass[@image="bulkApexTest"])=0] returns me 2 nodes sWrapper and bulkApexTest
Not sure why I'm getting 2 nodes as a result for the above expression. Is there a way to check an occurrence of methodname in an apex class?
Cheers
G.Senthilnathan
…________________________________
From: Clément Fournier <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, 17 July 2019 6:44 PM
To: pmd/pmd
Cc: haigsn; Author
Subject: Re: [pmd/pmd] Apex_CustomRule: Check existence of specific class / method name using count function (#1919)
Hi, on a first look there are two things that are wrong with your XPath expression:
* A nested class in Apex is a UserClass directly under another UserClass (UserClassMethods is not a node, at least with PMD 6.16.0)
* When you want to look for the children of a node, you shouldn't prefix the nested XPath expression with / -> this would search for children of the root of the document, not of the context node.
So
//UserClass[count(/UserClassMethods[@image="bulkApexTest"])=0]
becomes
//UserClass[count(./UserClass[@image="bulkApexTest"])=0]
Notice the nested expression starts with ./, to select the children of the context node (which here is the outer UserClass).
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#1919?email_source=notifications&email_token=AMUJ2J74JPPZLRUVUBK3BYTP73LYXA5CNFSM4IENHLT2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2DPSSA#issuecomment-512162120>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMUJ2J2ES5O6LAFPYUPBGJTP73LYXANCNFSM4IENHLTQ>.
|
|
A method in the Apex AST is represented by a node named
I don't really understand what you did with that code fragment. Did you replace your method with a class? Does this Apex code compile? The AST looks broken. Are you using the rule designer to inspect the AST? Be aware that it might show a parse tree even though the code does not compile (that's Apex-specific behaviour, which #1741 intends to fix). So until that's implemented, you should check yourself that the code is valid Apex
The expression //UserClass[count(./UserClass[@Image="bulkApexTest"])=0]selects all classes that do not have a nested class called |
|
Thanks again for the response. First of all, I didn't make any changes to the code. To avoid any confusion, please use the below one. @IsTest
public class NS_CISCalloutAPIService_Test {
@isTest static void test_shouldBuildCorrectQueryFilterStringForSearchByLatLong(){
String latitude = '-45.000000';
String longitude = '45.000000';
DF_SF_Request__c request = new DF_SF_Request__c();
// request.Opportunity_Bundle__c = opptyBundle.Id;
request.Search_Type__c = NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LAT_LONG;
request.Latitude__c = latitude;
request.Longitude__c = longitude;
request.Status__c = NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_PENDING;
request.Response__c = JSON.serialize(new SF_ServiceFeasibilityResponse());
// stub cis
RequestCapturingCisCalloutMock cisCalloutMock = new RequestCapturingCisCalloutMock();
Test.setMock(HttpCalloutMock.class, cisCalloutMock);
Test.startTest();
NS_CISCalloutAPIService.makeCISCallOut(request);
System.assert(cisCalloutMock.getRequestQueryString().endsWith('?filter=geocode.latitude='+latitude+',geocode.longitude='+longitude+'&include=containmentBoundaries'));
Test.stopTest();
}
private class RequestCapturingCisCalloutMock implements HttpCalloutMock {
private String requestQueryString;
public HttpResponse respond(HttpRequest httpRequest){
requestQueryString = httpRequest.getEndpoint();
HttpResponse resp = new HttpResponse();
resp.setStatusCode(200);
resp.setStatus('ok');
resp.setHeader('Content-Type', 'application/json');
resp.setBody('{ "data": [{ "type": "location", "id": "LOC000000000025", "attributes": { "dwellingType": "MDU", "region": "Urban", "regionValueDefault": "FALSE", "externalTerritory": "FALSE", "address": { "unstructured": "HILLSIDE NURSING HOME UNIT 212 3 VIOLET TOWN RD MOUNT HUTTON NSW 2290", "roadNumber1": "3", "roadName": "VIOLET TOWN", "roadTypeCode": "RD", "locality": "MOUNT HUTTON", "postCode": "2290", "unitNumber": "212", "unitType": "UNIT", "state": "NSW", "siteName": "HILLSIDE NURSING HOME" }, "primaryAccessTechnology": { "technologyType": "Fibre to the node", "serviceClass": "13", "rolloutType": "Brownfields" }, "csaId": "CSA200000010384", "serviceabilityMessage": null, "serviceabilityDate": null, "serviceabilityClassReason": null, "geoCode": { "latitude": "-32.9873616", "longitude": "151.67177704", "geographicDatum": "GDA94", "srid": "4283" }, "landUse": "RESIDENTIAL" }, "relationships": { "containmentBoundaries": { "data": [{ "id": "2BLT-03-11", "type": "NetworkBoundary", "boundaryType": "ADA" }, { "id": "2BLT-03", "type": "NetworkBoundary", "boundaryType": "SAM" }, { "id": "S2 - Mount Hutton - Windale", "type": "NetworkBoundary", "boundaryType": "SSA" }, { "id": "2BLT", "type": "NetworkBoundary", "boundaryType": "FSA" }, { "id": "2HAM", "type": "NetworkBoundary", "boundaryType": "AAR" }] }, "MDU": { "data": { "id": "LOC100062870710", "type": "location" } } } }], "included": [{ "type": "NetworkBoundary", "id": "2BLT-03-11", "attributes": { "boundaryType": "ADA", "status": "INSERVICE", "technologyType": "Copper", "technologySubType": "FTTN" } }, { "type": "NetworkBoundary", "id": "2BLT-03", "attributes": { "boundaryType": "SAM", "status": "INSERVICE", "technologyType": "Multiple" } }, { "type": "NetworkBoundary", "id": "S2 - Mount Hutton - Windale", "attributes": { "boundaryType": "SSA", "status": "PLANNED", "technologyType": "Satellite" } }, { "type": "NetworkBoundary", "id": "2BLT", "attributes": { "boundaryType": "FSA", "status": "INSERVICE", "technologyType": "Multiple" } }, { "type": "NetworkBoundary", "id": "2HAM", "attributes": { "boundaryType": "AAR", "status": "PLANNED", "technologyType": "Multiple" } }] }');
return resp;
}
public String getRequestQueryString(){
return requestQueryString;
}
}
@isTest static void shouldSetErrorStatusesOnSFRequests() {
// stub cis
CisExceptionCalloutMock cisCalloutMock = new CisExceptionCalloutMock();
Test.setMock(HttpCalloutMock.class, cisCalloutMock);
List<DF_SF_Request__c> requests = new List<DF_SF_Request__c>();
requests.add(createSFRequest('wrong_search_type', null, null, null, null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LOCATION_ID, '', null, null, null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LOCATION_ID, null, null, null, null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LAT_LONG, null, '', '', null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LAT_LONG, null, null, null, null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_ADDRESS, null, null, null, 'wrong_postcode'));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_ADDRESS, null, null, null, null));
requests.add(createSFRequest(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.SEARCH_TYPE_LOCATION_ID, 'LOC123456789012', null, null, null));
Test.startTest();
List<DF_SF_Request__c> results = NS_CISCalloutAPIService.getLocation(requests);
Test.stopTest();
Assert.equals(8, results.size());
DF_SF_Request__c result;
result = results.get(0);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_UNKNOWN, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(1);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_LOCID, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(2);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_LOCID, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(3);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_LATLONG, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(4);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_LATLONG, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(5);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_ADDRESS, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(6);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_ADDRESS, getResponseStatus(result));
result = results.get(7);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_ERROR, result.Status__c);
Assert.equals(NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_INVALID_UNKNOWN, getResponseStatus(result));
}
private static String getResponseStatus(DF_SF_Request__c request){
SF_ServiceFeasibilityResponse sfResponse = (SF_ServiceFeasibilityResponse) System.JSON.deserialize(request.Response__c, SF_ServiceFeasibilityResponse.class);
return sfResponse.Status;
}
private static DF_SF_Request__c createSFRequest(String searchType, String locId, String latitude, String longitude, String postcode){
DF_SF_Request__c request = new DF_SF_Request__c();
request.Search_Type__c = searchType;
request.Location_Id__c = locId;
request.Latitude__c = latitude;
request.Longitude__c = longitude;
request.Status__c = NS_CISCalloutAPIUtils.STATUS_PENDING;
request.Postcode__c = postcode;
request.Response__c = JSON.serialize(new SF_ServiceFeasibilityResponse());
return request;
}
private class CisExceptionCalloutMock implements HttpCalloutMock {
public HttpResponse respond(HttpRequest httpRequest){
throw new CustomException('CIS server error');
}
}
public static bulkApexTest()
{
string ABCD
if (caseRecord!= sCase)
{
caseRecord = ABCD
caseId = caseRecord.Id;
}
}
}This is the high level AST structure of the code. One base class & 2 child class.
When I used the below expression //UserClass[count(./Method[@Image='bulkApexTest'])=0]I get 2 nodes
As you pointed out in your earlier post this is correct, as the expression is executed against all classes (Both Base & Child) and the above child classes doesn't have the "bulkApexTest" method. Now, my question is Is it possible to check the method existence at the base class only? So, when I execute the expression //UserClass[count(./Method[@Image='bulkApexTest'])=0]This should verify only the base class and throw an alert |
Absolutely :) An XPath expressions may start in one of three ways:
So to check only the toplevel class you just use |
|
Thanks again for your response Clement. I'm able to get the method under the root element using the below expression Need your further input to validate the below expression to get the count of the method occurrence. Because, In my custom rule, I'm planning to throw an alert if the count =0 /Method[@image='bulkApexTest'][count(.)=0] Please check and suggest |
|
I have tried Boolean, String functions without any success :-( |
|
You should instead use /UserClass[count(./Method[@Image='bulkApexTest'])=0]There are no Method nodes under the root element, so |
|
Hi Mate, I have tried this before. Unfortunately, this return 2 nodes Which means this expression is executed against each userclass eventhough we used "/" prefix instead of the base class. The expectation is that this rule should not be violated as it has the method "bulkApexTest". your suggestion is much appreciated on solving this issue. |
|
I can't reproduce your issue. Both with the designer and with PMD 6.16.0 a Apex rule with an XPath expression exactly as defined in my last message does not match the code you provided. Using Please provide more information about how you are running your rule (PMD version chiefly, ruleset file if you have one). If you are using the designer, please note that some older designer versions are bugged and may not refresh results when the XPath expression is edited, but only when the code is edited. On those versions you can trigger evaluation by changing the code trivially (eg remove a brace and readd it). Please make sure you use the latest version anyway. |
|
I'm using designer v6.16.0. upon executing the below expression, /UserClass[count(./Method[@image='bulkApexTest'])=0] I'm getting the 2 nodes as I mentioned earlier. upon changing this to = 1 doesn't return any results /UserClass[count(./Method[@image='bulkApexTest'])=1]. I'm using designer to see the output and copying the content by clicking "Export XPath to XML Rule button". Let me know, how I can share the screenshot / attachment. Below is the ruleset |
|
I'm pasting the Apex code again for your reference /**
@istest // request.Opportunity_Bundle__c = opptyBundle.Id; public static bulkApexTest() |
|
You're using Edit: that's at least true for the first snippets you pasted. Your exported XML rule has a capital i. Was that the problem? |
|
This was more of copy/paste issue as I was using multiple different options. But, I'm using "@image" in the expression as well as in Rule :-) |
|
Sorry, I believe it's mainly because of the editor. When I type "@image", this editor translates it into uncaptitalized |
|
Hmm it's kind of hard to follow. Does it work if you capitalize the name in the designer then? |
|
No..it doesn't work :-( |
|
Ah I got it. You're using XPath 1.0. There's an inconsistency in our implementation of XPath 1.0 vs 2.0, which I'll describe in another issue (#1938) To make your thing work, either use this with XPath 2.0: /UserClass[count(./Method[@Image='bulkApexTest'])=0]or use the following with XPath 1.0, /self::UserClass[count(./Method[@Image='bulkApexTest'])=0] |
|
Note though, that XPath 1.0 support is being deprecated and will be removed with the next major version. So you should definitely use 2.0 instead |
|
oh..finally..It's working in designer by changing the XPATH to 2.0. But, it's failing in PMD. how we can let the PMD to use XPATH 2.0? Is there any flag while running it? |
|
Try re exporting your rule from the designer. You'll see there's another property added to the rule tag: <property name="version" value="2.0"/> |
|
Awesome Clement, Thank you very much for your assistance. I hope, I'll be able to write few more custom rules with the learning. Will get back to you, in case of any issues..you are a rockstar!!! |
|
No problem :) Please open new issues when you run into trouble - I'm closing this one |
adangel
added
the
a:question
This issue was moved to a discussion.
You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →
I'm writing customrule to verify an ApexTestClass has specific class (with specific name e.g. "bulkApexTest") implemented. To achieve this, I'm planning the following
Check the ApexTestClass not having class with name = 'bulkApexTest'. To do this, I was trying using count function (//UserClass[count(/UserClassMethods[@image="bulkApexTest"])=0]. But this expression is not returning the expected results. please find the sample code below.
/***************************************************************************************************
Class Name: AddSite_CX
****************************************************************************************************/
public class AddSite_CX {
public Site_Contacts__c siteContactObj {get; set;}
Public Case caseRecord {get; Set;}
Public String contactId {get; set;}
Public String siteContactRecordTypeId {get; set;}
Public String locIdString {get; set;}
Public String locIAddressString {get; set;}
Public String siteSFId {get; set;}
Public Boolean showSaveButton{get; set;}
Public String noValue{get; set;}
Public Boolean throwError {get; Set;}
Public Boolean hasrecords {get; set;}
Public Boolean showAdvSearchComponent {get; set;}
Public String caseId {get; set;}
Public String newSiteId {get; set;}
Public Set setRelatedSites {get; set;}
Public Map<String, Id> mapOfSiteRecordTypeNamesAndId {get; set;}
Public AddressSearch_CX.addressWrapper unStructuredAddress {get; set;}
public pagereference updateCaseWithSiteInfo(){
system.debug('*** newSiteId ==>'+ newSiteId);
case c= [select id,site__c,site__r.name from case where id=:caseId];
c.site__c = ID.valueof(newSiteId);
update c;
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: