|
I am running an application after my .NET solution is built to check for uniqueness of a parameter to a common method call in my solution.
What I want that application to do is step through the code looking for the method call, then inspect 1 parameter of the method call to ensure it has a unique value from all other invocations of that method.
Ex.
class TheClassThatContainsTheMethod
{
public void TheMethod(int iSomeValue)
{
...
}
}
I want to check all the places in code that invoke TheMethod(), inspect the value of iSomeValue and determine whether or not it is unique from all other TheMethod() invocations.
Note: Literal numbers will be passed into TheMethod(), not variables. So, I will know the value at compile time.
Anyone know if this possible and, if so, a rough outline of how to pull if off in C#?
|
|
|
|
|
Since you want this to happen after the build my first thought would be create a Visual Studio extension to handle this. This would give you easy access to all of the code artifacts to search through.
You can find a good starting point here http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/vstudio/ff718165[^]
I know the language. I've read a book. - _Madmatt
|
|
|
|
|
You would either need to do it on the source code itself using the C# parser or do it after the fact on the binary using reflection, etc.
In reality though, its impossible to cover all the cases. There are lots of different ways to call a method that you would be hard pressed to pick up on using either the C# parser or reflection. I.e., I can call it directly, through a delegate, through reflection, through expression trees, through a lamba expression, etc.
Your best bet to be completely fool proof is to have a check in the method itself.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you for the response.
I am curious as to how I could do this in the method iself. Can you explain this?
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
If I'm to understand, you want to do something like:
SomeMethod(5);
and then never let anybody call SomeMethod(5) again right? Only SomeMethod(4), SomeMethod(6), etc?
So you can just maintain a static list or dictionary or tree with the values that have been passed in and reject dupes.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah...that's the gist of it, with one more wrinkle; there will be intermediate calls that accept a variable for the error number.
EX:
class M
{
public void TheMethod(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber)
{
...
}
}
public class T
{
public void ErrorOccurred(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber, int iCallerID, ...)
{
M.TheMethod(sMessage, iTheUniqueErrorNumber);
...
}
public void DoSomeWork()
{
...
...
// Some error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2345, this.ThreadID, ...);
...
...
...
...
// Some other error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2346, this.ThreadID, ...);
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
You can do a Global Find using regular expressions from within Visual Studio.
|
|
|
|
|
One problem I would run into is that there may be intermediate method calls of various signatures before the call is finally made to my method. If I want to go the regular expression route, I would need to know all those signatures as well, which are added, edited or removed throughout the project.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure there is an easy way to do that, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. Here is one way to go about it.
You'll need to create a post-build event to call your code that inspects the assembly.
The code to inspect the assembly will first have to load up the just-built assembly. You can then get a list of all the types in that assembly (see here).
Next, you'll need to inspect the methods on each of those types:
public void InspectMethod(MethodInfo mi)
{
var body = mi.GetMethodBody();
var ilBytes = body.GetILAsByteArray();
}
The only way I can see to check calls to your method would be to manually inspect the IL. That's the part that I don't think will be easy, but it should be doable. You can read about that here: "Parsing the IL of a Method Body".
This sounds like a big pain in the rear, and I can think of very few scenarios where this would be necessary or even useful. Perhaps if you let us know what you're trying to accomplish by doing this, we could suggest another way.
Fixign now. | But who's fixing the fixign? |
|
|
|
|
|
For a one parameter method with static arguments it's pretty easy, it will be two adjacent IL calls. But I would do this on the source, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you very much for the response.
We are supplying and error code (a unique number) to each error message in our system.
I want to create a process that ensures the numbers are unique.
|
|
|
|
|
Your question isn't clear to me; do you want uniqueness statically or dynamically?
I trust
TheMethod(1);
TheMethod(2);
is OK.
What about
for(int i=0; i<10; i++) TheMethod(3);
as this will call TheMethod ten times (unless an exception emerges).
And what about
if (someBool) {
a=a+1;
TheMethod(4);
} else {
TheMethod(4);
b=b+2;
}
as now only one of them will be executed?
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
The idea is to statically assign a unique error number to each error log in our system.
Thank you for the response,
Dale
|
|
|
|
|
Ah. A little contextual information goes a long way.
So you want the parameter to be unique when statically looking at your source code: each location where SignalError(int number) is called, number will be a constant and has to be different.
This is what I would do:
- assume all source files are in a single folder and its subfolders (and no unrelated files are there);
- create a little app that enumerates, then reads those files (use the 3-parm overload of Directory.GetFiles)
- look for lines that hold the method name, extract the numeric parameter, and add it to a Dictionary; this will throw an exception when the key already exists, i.e. when the number has been entered earlier.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
I was thinking if I could get a start, I could figure out the rest.
But, I mislead with my simple example.
There will be levels of method calls between mine and the point in code where the unique error number is supplied.
So, it won't be a simple check for calls to my method because those calls in turn will take a variable error number (but, the error number always tied to exactly 1 line in code).
Ex:
class M
{
public void TheMethod(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber)
{
...
}
}
public class T
{
public void ErrorOccurred(string sMessage, int iTheUniqueErrorNumber, int iCallerID, ...)
{
M.TheMethod(sMessage, iTheUniqueErrorNumber);
...
}
public void DoSomeWork()
{
...
...
// Some error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2345, this.ThreadID, ...);
...
...
...
...
// Some other error occurs
ErrorOccurred("Blah blah blah", 2346, this.ThreadID, ...);
}
}
|
|
|
|
|
OK, so if the number of related methods (such as ErrorOccurred) is rather small, you could still make a list ("intermediateCallers") of them; you could do this either manually, or by generating a list of all methods calling TheMethod with a variable error number, not a constant one (you would have to make sure the list is good!).
You could then search all code for calls to either TheMethod or any method in intermediateCallers; parse the error number (I know, the method signature may vary, you have to teach your utility that); if it is a variable one, hope or check you are inside an intermediateCallers method; if it is a constant, check it in your Dictionary.
Luc Pattyn [Forum Guidelines] [My Articles] Nil Volentibus Arduum
Please use <PRE> tags for code snippets, they preserve indentation, improve readability, and make me actually look at the code.
|
|
|
|
|
For creating a setup CD for this application, pre-requisite is required for the .Net framework.
For example the default ticked is: Microsoft .net framework 4 client profile (x86 and x64)
Question:
Should I also tick Microsoft .net framework 4 (x86 and x64) ?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
It's not needed unless you want to make them install the entire framework.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am having two list boxes and im trying to add new items,
editing the items in the list box and
removing the items from the list box
i am unable to save the list names after every button click action
can any one please help me to save the items in the List box after every button control
|
|
|
|
|
You've posted three fairly simple questions on list boxes in two hours. Maybe you should invest some time in actually learning how to use C# and WinForms.
Also, your question is unclear. What do you mean, save? List boxes maintain their state naturally, you don't need to save anything when you change the items list.
|
|
|
|
|
You have to be more clear on your question what exactly you want.
A simple way how to add items in Listbox.
Listbox1.Items.Add("Item One");
Listbox1.Items.Add("Item Two");
I Love T-SQL
"Don't torture yourself,let the life to do it for you."
If my post helps you kindly save my time by voting my post.
www.aktualiteti.com
|
|
|
|
|
cho mình hỏi muốn tạo cái Save As trong notepad++ phai lam sao vậy
|
|
|
|
|
ku_do_thien wrote: cho mình hỏi muốn tạo cái Save As trong notepad++ phai lam sao vậy
I don't understand, which language is this?!
I Love T-SQL
"Don't torture yourself,let the life to do it for you."
If my post helps you kindly save my time by voting my post.
www.aktualiteti.com
|
|
|
|
|
This what Google translator gave me :
ask yourself what you want to create Save As tron notepad++ fade lam sao so.
Its in Vietnamese BTW.
People with high attitude deserve the standing ovation of our highest finger!
My Blog![ ^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
