Below I have added a screenshot to explain the issue. I am trying to fix certain warnings across solution, not just in a single file. It's really hard to fix them across solution when you're editing an old project with 1,000+ files and you've got 1000+ warnings that could simply be fixed in a matter of minutes, but I've been juggling with them for days.
Is there a way to enable ReSharper option to fix across solution? Or fix across folder even. This happens with a lot of issues, "Remove redundant initializer", "Remove case 0", and "Convert body to LINQ"
You can change the Resharper settings from Resharper Options menu.
Go to :
Resharper --> Options --> Code Inspection --> Inspection Severity.
Choose C# or VB.Net as per your project language then find "Language Usage Opportunities" and change the settings for "Convert body to LINQ" from 'Warning' to 'Hint'.
Your other problems are also can be fix in similar manner.
I create a project, and add a file. I can build an exe and so on, works fine.
Question is: what if I have multiple files in my project and I want to check the syntax of my code in one single file, and don't want to build an exe or dll?
When programming c, I press ctrl+F7 in the Visual Studio IDE and that compiles my code. I understand that there are no object files in c#. Microsoft c# reference states: "There are no object (.obj) files created as a result of invoking the C# compiler; output files are created directly.".
Is there a csc.exe switch to tell me 'ok your code looks fine', or 'the expression at line xx doesn't make sense'?
Note: please do not give the link to Command-line Building With csc.exe. All the sample command lines are for creating an exe or dll, from one or multiple files. Or on how to exclude a file from building. I don't want that.
The compiler is the syntax checker. It will tell you if your C# code is valid or not when it compiles it. Any errors or warnings will be available at the end of the attempted compilation. If there are none, then it's valid code.
You can individually compile any arbitrary piece of C# code any time you like. However, if that code depends on other code then in order for it to be valid that other code will need to be included in the compilation as well. Code which uses otherwise undefined symbols (such as classes defined in other code files) isn't valid. Those symbols need to be defined.
In the comments above you indicate a concern that such compilation of an entire project might take a long time. This would be addressed by organizing your code into smaller components. If you have one enormous C# project that takes a long time to compile, then what you have is a mess. Break it apart into smaller components. Each of those components can be in their own projects which can be compiled separately. Different projects will depend on each other, and dependent projects will be included in that compilation. But that dependency graph also shouldn't be too large and unwieldy. If it is, you still have a mess but just on a different scale. Keep the dependency graph shallow and maintainable between your projects.
Sort of answering my own question. When I posted this I wasn't aware that splitting definition and implementation in c#, as you did in c or c++, was not possible. https://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/64800602-4ff2-4747-8c42-a4e1980d4124/c-no-header-files-all-code-is-written-inline-why?forum=csharplanguage states that Interfaces do this, but not in a way I asked in the original post. Looks like in a multi file project, only the IDE gives me this piece of information (syntax checking), other than building the whole project.
It appears that ctrl+F7 on a single file (Visual Studio), or -c or -fsyntax-only switches (on gcc) are not possible with c#.
How can I selectively ignore compiler warnings at a folder level without altering the source code files (*.cs)? With the toy example below, I want to ignore CS0001 only for Lib1 (reviewed it to be ok) but nowhere else (since they could be unreviewed). Right now I can ignore compiler warnings only at the project level. Or I need to add #pragma to the source code which makes my source different from the library repository upstream which we cannot directly use (or link).
Project
+-LibSrc
+-Lib1 // Ignore CS0001 here
+-Lib2 // Ignore CS0002 here
+-Lib3
I'm hoping for some sort of project setting or some file places in the folder that signals this to the C# tools.
You can select the files to ignore, on File Properties, set Build Action to None. The compiler would ignore warnings from the files and build.
Is there a way to easily stop StyleCop warnings from being displayed within specific projects in a solution. Or, more pointedly, a way to select which projects StyleCop analysis should be performed on by Visual Studio?
We have a solution with 9 projects in it. There are only 2 projects that I actually want to see StyleCop warnings for, so I've created StyleCop.Settings files within those project root directories. This means that, for the rest of the projects, the default rule set is applied and I get a screen full of warnings every time I open a class.
The only way I can think to remove these warnings is to add another StyleCop.Settings file a folder level above with all the rules switched off and set merge options on the specific Settings files I am interested in to not merge with this parent file. This just feels wrong though. Is there a cleaner option or is this my only one?
UPDATE: I'm specifically looking for a way to stop the warnings from appearing within Visual Studio. I've added a Settings.StyleCop file to the solution folder and disabled all the rules. I run StyleCop analysis across one of my test projects and there are no errors reported. However, opening a test class reveals a raft of StyleCop warnings, which I want to suppress. Could this be the StyleCop for ReSharper plugin? I have a code cleanup profile created and have disabled certain rules within there but that doesn't appear to make any difference within my test classes.
Please have a look at File Lists configuration - they allow to disable rules by default per project:
Enabled Or Disabled By Default
In addition, a new setting allows you to determine whether rules
should be enabled or disabled by default. This can be set either at
the project level or at the SourceFileList level. For example, here’s
how you would set up a project with all rules disabled by default, and
only two rules explicitly enabled:
<StyleCopSettings Version="4.3">
<GlobalSettings>
<BooleanProperty Name="RulesEnabledByDefault">False</BooleanProperty>
</GlobalSettings>
We have a moderately sized solution, with about 20 projects. In one of them I have my business entities. On compiling any project, visual studio waits and hangs about one and a half minutes on this BusinessEntities project.
I tried our solution in SharpDevelop and it compiles our complete solution, in 18 seconds. Similar timing with MSBuild.
My guess is that VS is trying to find out if the project needs a compile, but this process is about 15 times slower than actually performing the compile!!
I can't switch to the great sharpdevelop, it lacks some small, but essential requirements for our debugging scenarios.
Can I prevent VS from checking this project, And have it compile the projects without such a check, just like sharpdevelop?
I already know about unchecking projects in configuration management to prevent building some projects, but my developers will forget they need to compile this project after updating to latest sources and they face problems that seem strange to them.
Edit: Interesting results of an investigation: The delay happens to one of the projects only. In configuration manager I unchecked all projects, then compiled each of them individually. All projects compile in a few seconds!! The point is this: if that special project is built directly, compiles in a few seconds, if it is being built (or skipped, because it is up-to-date) as a result of building another project that depends on it, VS hangs for about a minute and half, and then decides to compile it (or skip it). My conclusion: Visual studio is checking to know if any files are changed, but for some reasons, for this special project it is extremely inefficient!!
I'd go to Tools -> Options -> Projects and Solutions -> Build and Run and then change the "MSBuild project build [output|build log] verbosity" to Diagnostic. At that level it will include timings which should help you track down the issue.
We had the same problem with an ASP.NET MVC web project running in Visual Studio 2013. We build the project and nothing happens for about a minute or so and then the output window shows that we are compiling.
Here's what fixed it... open the .csproj file in a text editor and set MvcBuildViews to false:
<MvcBuildViews>false</MvcBuildViews>
I had to use sysinternals process monitor to figure this out but it's clearly the cause for my situation. The site compiles in less than 5 seconds now and previously took over a minute. During that minute the Asp.net compilation process was putting files and directories into the Temporary Asp.net Files folder.
Warning: If you set this, you'll no longer precompile your views so you will lose the ability to see syntax errors in your views at build time.
There is the possibility that you are suffering from VS inspecting other freshly built assemblies for the benefit of the currently compiling project.
When an assembly is built, VS will inspect the references of the target assembly, which if they are feshly built or new versions, may include actually loading them in a .Net domain, which bears all the burdens of loading an assembly as though you were going to run it. The build can get progressively slower as it rebuilds more and more projects. When one assembly becomes newer the others do a lot more work. This is one possible explanation for why building by itself, versus already built, versus building clean, all have seemingly relevantly differing results. Its really tht the others changed and not about the one being compiled.
VS will 'mark down' the last 'internal' build number of the referenced assembly and look to see if the referenced assembly actually changed as it rolls through its build process. If its not differnt, a ton of work gets skipped. And yes, there are internal assembly build numbers that you dont control. This is probalby not in any way due to the actual c# compiler or its work or anything post-compile, but pre-compile steps necessary for the most general cases.
There are several reference oriented settings you can play with, and depending on your dev, test, or deployments needs, the functional differences may be irrelevant, however may profoundly impact how VS behaves and how long it takes during build.
Go to the references of one of the projects in Solution Explorer:
1) click on a reference
2) open the properties pane if its not (not the Property Pages or the Property Manager)
3) look at 'Copy Local', 'Embed Interop Types', 'Reference Output Assembly'; those may be very applicable and probably something good to know about regardless. I strongly suggest looking up what they do on MSDN. 'Reference Output Assembly' may or may not show in the list.
4) unload the project, and edit the .proj file in VS as text. look for the assembly reference in the XML and look for 'Private'. This means whether the assembly referenced is to be treated as though its going to be a private assembly from the referencing assemblies perspective, vs a shared one. Which is sort of a wordy way of saying, will that assembly be deployed as a unit with the other assemblies together. This is very important toward unburdening things. Background: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc164080.aspx
So the basic idea here is that you want to configure all of these to be the least expensive, both during build and after deployment. If you are building them together, then for example you probably really don't need 'Copy Local'. Id hate to say more about how you should configure them without knowing more about your needs, but its a very fine thing to go read a few good paragraphs about each. This gets very tricky however, because you also influence whether VS will use the the stale old one when resolving before the referenced one is rebuilt. As a further example explaiing that its good to go read about these, Copy Local can use the local copy, even though its stale, so having this set can be double bad. Just remember the goal at the moment is to lower the burden of VS loading newly built assemblies jsut to compile the others.
Lastly, for now, I can easily say that hanging for only 1.5 mins is getting off very lucky. There are people with much much worse build times due to things like this ;)
Some troubleshooting idea's that have not been mentioned:
Clean solution?
Delete Obj and Bin folders plus the .suo file? FYI, neither Clean nor Rebuild will delete non-build files, eg files copied during a pre-build command.
Turn off VS scanning outside files. Options > tools > environment > document > detect when file is changed outside the environment?
Rollback SVN history to confirm when it started to occur? What changed? If the project file on day 1 takes the same time, recreate the project, add all the files and build.
Otherwise could you please run Process Monitor and let us know what Visual Studio is doing in the prep-build stage?
Sounds silly, but remove all breakpoints first. It sped up my pre-build checks massively - still don't know why though.
Based on the (limited) information provided one possibility is that there could be a pre-build action specified in the project file that is slow to compile.
Try disabling platform verification task as described here.
If your individual projects are compiling correctly then all you can do is change order of compilation by setting dependent projects explicitly in configuration.
Try to visualize your project dependency hierarchy and set dependent projects. For example, if your business entities project is referenced in each project, then in configuration of each project, this project must be selected as dependent.
When an explicit build order is not set, visual studio is analyzing projects to create an order of building project. Setting explicit dependent projects wiki make visual studio skip this step and use the order provided by you.
With such an extreme delay on a single project and no other avenue seeming to provide a reason I would attempt to build that specific project while running procmon from sysinternals and filter out all the success messages. You could probably also narrow it down to just the file system actions as well. From your description I might guess that the files are being locked by an external source like the event collection or workflow management process services.
Other things to consider would be whether or not this is a totally clean build machine or if it has been used to perhaps test the builds as well? If so, is there a chance that someone mapped an IIS application path to the project directly or registered it as a service location?
If you run procmon and see no obvious locks or conflicts I would create a totally new solution and project and copy the files over to see if that project also has the same delay. If it does have the same delay I would create a sample project of the same type but generic data (essentially empty) and see if that too is slow. If the new project with the same files builds fine you can then diff the directories to see what the variance is that causes the problem (perhaps a config or project setting).
For me, thoroughly disabling code analyzers helped per instructions here:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/visualstudio/code-quality/disable-code-analysis?view=vs-2019#net-framework-projects.
I thought my code analyzers were already off, but adding the extra xml helped.
Thanks Kaleb's for the suggestion to set "MSBuild project build [output|build log] verbosity" to Diagnostic. The first message took more than 10 seconds to display:
Property reassignment: $(Features)=";flow-analysis;flow-analysis" (previous value: ";flow-analysis") at C:\myProjectDirectory\packages\Microsoft.NetFramework.Analyzers.2.9.3\build\Microsoft.NetFramework.Analyzers.props (32,5)
Which led me to the code analyzers.
Just in case someone else trips into this issue:
In my case the delay was being caused by an invalid path entry in "additional include directories" that referred to a non accessible UNC location.
Once this was corrected, the delay disappeared.