users#create is mapped as the callback method for omniauth. After the user is created in a call to User.from_omniauth (which takes an instance of OmniAuth::AuthHash as the sole argument) and assigned to the #user variable, I make the following call:
session[:remember_token] = #user.remember_token
However, upon inspection, the value of session[:remember_token] immediately after this line of code is nil (the output of a call to puts session[:remember_token]). I'm using Figaro and have ENV['SECRET_KEY_BASE'] set. Any ideas on why sessions just aren't being set?
Related
I'm trying to call this method "window._e2e_cookie_popup_actions.acceptAll()" which basically sets the cookie policy in local storage.
When I call this method on browser console, it works perfectly.
However, when I try this on Cypress, it says "TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'acceptAll')"
This is how I tried on Cypress
cy.window().then((window)=>{
window._e2e_cookie_popup_actions.acceptAll()
})
Expection: If this method is called, the cookie should be set.
Thank you in advance!
I'm using code below to debug an issue where it doesn't appear my session variable is being updated properly.
print(session)
session['review_status'] = 'Pending'
print('Session review_status is now: ' + session['review_status'])
print(session)
This is outputting the following:
<SecureCookieSession {'review_id': None, 'review_status': 'New'}>
Session review_status is now: Pending
<SecureCookieSession {'review_id': None, 'review_status': 'New'}>
I can't understand why the last print statement isn't reflecting that the review_status value should now be "Pending" and not "New".
The frontend is firing off about 5 ajax requests at once to this endpoint, but the first one should be changing the status to Pending, so by the time the other 4 return, it would be "Pending" for them.
It appears this was being caused by the asynchronous calls from the frontend. While watching the debug output, it seems that several of the calls were "finishing" before the Flask session was actually reflecting the new value that was stored.
When I converted the ajax call to "async: false", I then got the expected behavior after the first call finished (the remainder were no longer "New", but rather in "Pending").
I am going to leave this fix in place for now, but would be interested in alternatives to this, and getting a better understanding of how Gunicorn/Flask handles multiple requests to the same endpoint concurrently with regard to the session (ie: does the session remain static until all calls are fulfilled type thing).
My intent sends a webhook as part of slot filling if a parameter is missing from the user query. My webhook then uses logic to estimate the value of the parameter. How can I return this parameter as part of the WebhookResponse object? I am using the C# client library in an ASP.NET Core app.
My code is:
string fulfillmentText;
WebhookRequest request = null;
using (var reader = new StreamReader(Request.Body))
{
request = jsonParser.Parse<WebhookRequest>(reader);
}
//If Parameter-1 has no value
if (request.QueryResult.Fields["Parameter-1].StringValue.Length == 0)
{
fulfillmentText = "I have guessed the value of Parameter-1";
//I apply some logic that is unimportant to this question
//For the sake of simplicity, say I estimate the value of Parameter-1 to be "foobar"
//I want to be able to give the parameter this value like this:
parameter["Parameter-1"] = "foobar"
}
UPDATE
So, I have pretty much got it all working using Prisoner's method. I will retry sid8491's at some point too. My intent is trying to obtain a user's address. I have required custom entities to retrieve the street number, street name, suburb and state.
Without creating any contexts myself, the following context is automatically generated by Dialogflow: projects/telebot-pianomoves-v1/agent/sessions/2b42cbc8-2418-4231-e4c0-bd3a175f2ea8/contexts/1320fe35-4329-4176-b136-9221dfaddd4e_id_dialog_context. I receive this context in my webhook, and can then CHANGE the value of a parameter. Let's assume $Suburb_Entity had no value in the webhook request and my code then returned the above context with the a new value for Suburb_Entity. My code successfully changes the Suburb_Entity from "" to aspendale as can be seen by the webhook response json:
Now the odd thing is, although I changed the Suburb_Entity to an actual value in the outputContext of my webhook response, the actual parameter $Suburb_Entity only changes to the new value of Suburb_Entity from the outputContext on the NEXT detect intent request. So, keeping in mind the fact that I returned the new Suburb_Entity in the outputContext of the webhook response, this is the detect intent response I get - noting that $Suburb_Entity is yet to be changed:
On the next detect intent request, the webhook request parameter Suburb_Entity is set to aspendale and $Suburb_Entity also equals aspendale. The important thing about this, is $Suburb_Entity only changed to the outputContext parameter value on the NEXT detect intent request, of which would have triggered another webhook. $Suburb_Entity did not change during the same detect intent request as when I modified the outputContext parameter Suburb_Entity, but in the next. This leads me to believe that somehow, $Suburb_Entity inherits parameter values from this automatically generated context. The issue here, is that when my webhook responds with the outputContext paramter Suburb_Entity equalling aspendale, $Suburb_Entity does not change to this value until the next request. This means that if all the other parameters have values set, but $Suburb_Entity is yet to have changed value, then allRequiredParamsSet == false. If I return the Suburb_Entity in the outputContext, I want it to immediately change the value of $Suburb_Entity without requiring another detect intent request so that allRequiredParamsSet == true in such a circumstance. I tried setting the default value by doing this (it didn't work):
An alternative of course would be a way for me to force allRequiredParamsSet = true. I save the parameter values from this the context parameter, not the actual response. So I don't need $Suburb_Entity, I just want the intent to think that it has a value.
Cheers
When you use a webhook for "slot filling", the intention is that you return the prompts you want to ask the user for and continue to use the same Intent to handle the responses. You're not expected to create values yourself.
If you want to "fill in" some answers that are used in the static "response" section of the Dialogflow Intent, or if you just want to record the answers so you can use them later, you can set the parameters of a Context. In the response string, you can refer to this value as #context-name.parameter-name.
Update
I don't know the internal mechanics of slot filling, but it doesn't surprise me that setting a value in the internal context for the input parameters doesn't "register" until the next round of handling the Intent.
The webhook for slot filling isn't intended to create values - it is intended to handle values and create prompts for the user to respond to. Intents are generally about processing user inputs and webhooks about handling them.
My workaround suggested that if you want this for output, you use the context for output.
There are multiple steps for get it done:
First give an event in intent
Check your condition in webhook
If your condition is satisfied, invoke the intent by calling the event from webhook which you have defined in step 1
Pass the paylaod (in json format) along with event calling, give parameters in the payload
In the intent, give default value of parameter as #eventName.parameterName
Hope it helps.
After upgrading my .NET server and client projects to 4.0 RC
I get NullReference exceptions because my custom State object is null.
I instantiate the state property in OnOpen event handler, but inside the method body of the first call it is already null.
I have checked in debugger and see that this.GetHashCode() returns different values
in OnOpen event handler and in method, which means it is a different instance.
Is it a known issue? I assume it is very basic behavior and probably I have missed something during upgrade to new version.
Thanks in advance.
I managed to understand the problem. It happens when using PluginAlias.
[XSocketMetadata(PluginAlias =
When attribute is removed and client uses full controller name everything works as expected
and GetHashCode returns same id.
I pushed the replication code to GitHub:
https://github.com/amichel/PlayWithXSockets/tree/ReproduceBugs
When using alias there is a bug (as you have found out).
The workaround is to either use the class name of the controller or only have alias in lower casing.
In your case using
[XSocketMetadata(PluginAlias = "test")]
would work.
Regards
Uffe
I need to do a callout to webservice from my ApexController class. To do this, I have an asycn method with attribute #future (callout=true). The webservice call needs to refeence an object that gets populated in save call from VF page.
Since, static (future) calls does not all objects to be passed in as method argument, I was planning to add the data in a static Map and access that in my static method to do a webservice call out. However, the static Map object is getting re-initalized and is null in the static method.
I will really appreciate if anyone can give me some pointeres on how to address this issue.
Thanks!
Here is the code snipped:
private static Map<String, WidgetModels.LeadInformation> leadsMap;
....
......
public PageReference save() {
if(leadsMap == null){
leadsMap = new Map<String, WidgetModels.LeadInformation>();
}
leadsMap.put(guid,widgetLead);
}
//make async call to Widegt Webservice
saveWidgetCallInformation(guid)
//async call to widge webserivce
#future (callout=true)
public static void saveWidgetCallInformation(String guid) {
WidgetModels.LeadInformation cachedLeadInfo =
(WidgetModels.LeadInformation)leadsMap.get(guid);
.....
//call websevice
}
#future is totally separate execution context. It won't have access to any history of how it was called (meaning all static variables are reset, you start with fresh governor limits etc. Like a new action initiated by the user).
The only thing it will "know" is the method parameters that were passed to it. And you can't pass whole objects, you need to pass primitives (Integer, String, DateTime etc) or collections of primitives (List, Set, Map).
If you can access all the info you need from the database - just pass a List<Id> for example and query it.
If you can't - you can cheat by serializing your objects and passing them as List<String>. Check the documentation around JSON class or these 2 handy posts:
https://developer.salesforce.com/blogs/developer-relations/2013/06/passing-objects-to-future-annotated-methods.html
https://gist.github.com/kevinohara80/1790817
Side note - can you rethink your flow? If the starting point is Visualforce you can skip the #future step. Do the callout first and then the DML (if needed). That way the usual "you have uncommitted work pending" error won't be triggered. This thing is there not only to annoy developers ;) It's there to make you rethink your design. You're asking the application to have open transaction & lock on the table(s) for up to 2 minutes. And you're giving yourself extra work - will you rollback your changes correctly when the insert went OK but callout failed?
By reversing the order of operations (callout first, then the DML) you're making it simpler - there was no save attempt to DB so there's nothing to roll back if the save fails.