Reflector | Example of type safe properties reflection in Swift | Reflection library

One possible approach to solve the issue:

Setup an orthographic camera such that its frustum encloses the cube. You can then position the camera in front of each side of the cube, use lookAt( cube.position ) to orient it properly and then render the scene into a render target. You need one render target per side. You can then use it as a texture for the respective plane mesh.

There is an official live example that demonstrates how RTT (render-to-texture) is done with three.js. Try to use it as a code template for your own app.

https://threejs.org/examples/#webgl_rtt

Instead of passing the idKey as a constructor parameter, I would suggest reflecting it as metadata of the class. This way, you could do something like

From the docs https://laravel.com/docs/8.x/upgrade#seeder-factory-namespaces

The whole point is to make sure that your tests are isolated and data required or generated by a test, won't affect the result of a different test.

Re-creating the schema gives you this guarantee because each tests will start with a clean database.

That said, the creation/drop of the schema is a pretty heavy operation, and the more tests you add to the test suite, the slower it will become. The drawback is that you need to make sure that the data is cleaned after each test. This might not be too complicated to achieve in practice (you might need to pay special attention about different entities in different tests mapping to table with the same name) but if you are working an a small project or your database is really quick updating the schema, it might not be worth the hassle.

It's up to you to decide what works for your project.

As a practical example, in Hibernate Reactive we need to run the same tests on several different databases. We started re-creating the factory for each unit test, but because running tests was becoming too slow (especially on some databases), we've switched to re-creating the factory once for each test class. It helped us to save a lot of time because tests in the same class became so much faster.

In the end, you need to decide how your test suite is organised and the benefits of one approach over the other. But as long as you are reasonably sure that the tests won't affect each other, you can use the solution you prefer.

If you're just serving regular HTML, not using template engines, you don't need to call app.setVewEngine(). Just set up your static directory and you'll be good to go. You can read more about this in this answer

Resolved it myself. Create a mocked function and assign it to the create static method.

For an executable, dotnet publish; and ship the resulting folder is always correct.

But for a dll compiled against .net standard; I've only had success building a nuget package and referencing it and letting the compiler (whole package thereof) figure out what final dlls the project needs. You can make a nuget package with dotnet pack.

I have never needed binding redirects to link .netstandard to .net framework.

From the code, I think you are mixing global and local guard

In app.module.ts, the below code is for registering global guard. and app.useGlobalGuard() should be used together if you want to apply guard globally.