I have a dll named ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.dll.
Lets says it defines a type named ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFooSubClass.
It's been compiled for .NET.
Are there any tools (free, paid, whatever) that will generate c# or vb class files that will do nothing but wrap around everything defined in this expensive dll? That way I can add functionality, fix bugs (that CorpFUBAR won't fix), add logging, etc?
Literally, I want output that looks like this
namespace easytoread {
public class SubClass {
private ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubClass _originalSubClass;
public SubClass() {
this._originalSubClass = new ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubClass ();
}
public string StupidBuggyMethod(string param1,int param2) {
return _originalSubClass.StupidBuggyMethod(param1, param2);
}
}
}
It would have to handle custom return types as well as primitives
namespace easytoread {
public class SubFooClass {
private ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubFooClass _originalSubFooClass;
public SubFooClass() {
this._originalSubFooClass= new ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubFooClass ();
}
private SubFooClass(ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubFooClass orig) {
this._originalSubFooClass = orig;
}
public SubFooClass StupidBuggyMethod(string param1,int param2) {
return new SubFooClass(_originalSubFooClass.StupidBuggyMethod(param1, param2));
}
}
}
And so on and so forth for every single defined class.
Basically, poor mans dynamic proxy? (yay, Castle Project is awesome!)
We'd also like to rename some of our wrapper classes, but the tool doesn't need to do that.
Without renaming, we'd be able to replace the old assembly with our new generated one, change using statements and continue on like nothing happened (except the bugs were fixed!)
It just needs to examine the dll and do code generation. the generated code can even be VB.NET, or ironpython, or anything CLR.
This is a slippery slope and I'm not happy that I ended up here, but this seems to be the way to go. I looked at the Castle Project, but unless I'm mistaken that won't work for two reasons: 1) I can't rename anything (don't ask), 2) none of the assemblies methods are declared virtual or even overridable. Even if they were, there's hundreds of types I'd have to override manually, which doesn't sound fun.
ReSharper can do much of the work for you.
You will need to declare a basic class:
namespace easytoread {
public class SubClass {
private ExpensiveAndLargeObfuscatedFoo.SubClass _originalSubClass;
}
}
Then, choose ReSharper > Edit > Generate Code (Alt+Ins), select "Delegating Members", select all, and let it generate the code.
It won't wrap return values with custom classes (it will return the original type), so that would still have to be added manually.
It seems the best answer is "There is no such tool". So, I'll be taking a stab at writing my own later as an off-hours project. If I ever get something useful working I'll github it and update here.
UPDATE
Visual Studio 2012 Fakes seem to be promising. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/tfs/hh549175(v=vs.110).aspx - we've moved on but I might try creating a fake and then dropping it in as a replacement dll sometime in the future
If you have access to the source code, rename and fix in the source
code.
If you don't have access (and you can do it legally) use some
tool like Reflector or dotPeek to get the source code and then,
goto to the first point.
Related
I want to add this class as setting's type:
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Configuration;
namespace MY_PROJECT.SUB_PROJECT
{
[SettingsSerializeAs(SettingsSerializeAs.Xml)]
public class Configs: List<ConfigData>
{
Configs(int capacity): base(capacity) { }
public string GroupName { get; set; }
}
}
So what I did:
Select Browse... in the type dropbox:
I cannot see the MY_PROJECT namespace anywhere:
So I typed the full type manually:
The result is an error:
Type 'MY_PROJECT.SUB_PROJECT.Configs' is not defined.
I also tried SUB_PROJECT.Configs and Configs alone. Nothing helped. Why does my class not show in the browser?
In order to pull something in as a reference you need to have it compiled as a dll file. In Visual Studio they refer to this as a "Library" which is really just a class without a main function. Other option is to just leave it in the same namespace and pull the class into whatever else your working on.
I just had this issue and it was due to an Inconsistent accessibility error. Make sure that any 'required' type/field is globally accessible (public?). For the OP's case, making the constructor public solves the issue:
[SettingsSerializeAs(SettingsSerializeAs.Xml)]
public class Configs: List<ConfigData>
{
public Configs(int capacity): base(capacity) { }
// ^^
public string GroupName { get; set; }
}
In my case this was the problem:
internal struct NativeType
{
//...
}
[SettingsSerializeAs(SettingsSerializeAs.Xml)]
public class NativeTypeWrapper
{
public NativeType type; // This will not work because NativeType
// is less accessible than NativeTypeWrapper...
}
I had this problem as well. I was doing exactly the same: creating a custom class to use in Application Settings. In my case, I followed the steps outlined in this very informative article:
http://www.blackwasp.co.uk/CustomAppSettings.aspx
I should note the article is written for C#, and I painstakingly converted it to VB until it worked. I had to solve the Type...is not defined error the hard way: relentlessly experimenting until I got it to work.
I will describe my first solution, one which was not mentioned in the article, probably because it's for C# instead of VB, and that is: put the custom class or classes each in their own .vb files. For instance: Employee.vb and Room.vb. This is the only way I could make it work perfectly with no errors. After doing this and rebuilding the solution, I was then able to add my custom class as an Application Setting, but of course only by manually typing the full name TestProject.Employee in the Select a Type dialog.
However, following the article I linked above, if I put all the class definitions in the Module1.vb file with Sub Main(), the Select a Type dialog cannot find them, and I receive the Type...is not defined error.
And the cause of this error seems to be shortcomings in the code & design of the Applications Settings system and Settings page of the Project Properties dialog. I say this because of the solution I found: I hacked my classes into the settings the hard way.
What I mean by that is I initially created the setting with the name DefaultEmployee and type of String. Then I used the Find In Files dialog to find all instances of DefaultEmployee and replaced the appropriate instances of String with TestProject.Employee.
The files I made replacements in are: App.config, Settings.Designer.vb, and Settings.settings.
And it worked..! Sort of. I should say the code ran fine and it did what was expected. But...the Application Settings dialog didn't like it. After I made the changes, there are various errors from the Project Properties/Settings system every time I opened it. But as I said, it still works.
Thus...my only conclusion is the coding of the Settings system is not designed to handle this situation, and if you wish to have the most reliable & error-free experience, it's best to put each of the custom classes in their own .vb class file.
On the other hand, if you wish to become very adventurous, you could create your own Applications Settings system, as the author of this article did. I have not read all of this yet, but scanning through it seems very interesting:
https://weblog.west-wind.com/posts/2012/dec/28/building-a-better-net-application-configuration-class-revisited
At first I have a Multi-platform Project where I created a Class which transfers Data and my problem is that as example if I click a Button a method in this class should be called but I cannot reach the method.
This is my project structure:
The red part is where the Data Handler is located
the green part from where I get the clicked event and call the method.
I'll hope someone can help me with this problem!
As Jason mentioned in comment, you can not reach code from platform specific just like that, because you are not referencing platform specific projects, and there is something called DependencyService (which Jason also mentioned) and that will help you to solve this "issue" that you have.
This is how you can use DependencyService, inside your shared code project, create one interface in my case that will be:
public interface IDataHandler
{
string GetSomeStringValue();
}
Go to your iOS or other platform specific project and create new class DataHandler.cs (which you already have). And it should implement this interface that we created. Something like this:
[assembly: Dependency(typeof(DataHandler))]
namespace provisioning.ios
{
public class DataHandler: IDataHandler
{
public DataHandler()
{
}
public string GetSomeStringValue()
{
return "Some string value or whatever";
}
}
}
After that when you want to reach this method you will use DepedencyService inside of your shared code project like this:
private void SomeMethod()
{
string fromSpecificProject = DependencyService.Get<IDataHandler>().GetSomeStringValue();
}
If you want or need you can use this to pass some values to platform specific project and to return the data like I did it this mini example.
Note that implementations must be provided for each platform project
in your solution. Platform projects without implementations will fail
at runtime!
Strongly recommend you to take a look at official docs here.
Also I made this mini blogpost about usage of Dependency Service in Xamarin.Forms apps you can find it here.
I have a question regarding correct way to structure my application. I am a beginner on C# so excuse if I have some basis missing.
I looked on the web(not only stackoverflow) but didn't find any answer, so maybe this is just because I am doing something wrong?
I have a project in which there are several classes to define my objects.
Object1.class.cs
Object2.class.cs
...
Now for some functions, I created class libraries (.dll files) to externalise the code. The idea is if I need to make an update, I just need to replace .dll file, and not all the code.
But I meet a problem when I want to send objects to that class, I think because they are external to the solution?
So I begin to wonder if I do it correctly.
1) Is there a way to send an object from my project to a class I created separately?
2) Is this a good idea to work this way? I mean, I could of course add the library in my project, but in that case I will not have separated .dll files, and all get in a single .exe file.
3) When I need to test my class, I always need to close my project, and open the class to edit it, then come back to my project to test it. Is there an easier way to do it?
Thanks in advance for your advises
Edit 2.
Simone Cifani perfercly answered to my question :
1) Classes must be externalised
2) Add references to necessary classes in my external libraries
3) Add references to each class and external libraries in my main project
As I don't know how to use Interfaces I will do without it, but I think all will be fine even without.
A very common way to externalize part of the code is by using interfaces.
A simple example is:
//CalculatorInterface.dll
namespace Calculator.Interface
{
interface ICalculator
{
int DoCalculus(List<object> list);
}
}
//CalculatorImplementation_1.dll
// Add a reference to CalculatorInterface.dll
namespace Calculator.Implementation
{
using Calculator.Interface;
class CalculatorImplementation_1 : ICalculator
{
public int DoCalculus(List<object> list)
{
int result = 0;
foreach (Object obj in list)
{
if (obj is int)
{
result += (int)obj;
}
}
return result;
}
}
}
//Calculator.dll
// Add a reference to CalculatorInterface.dll
// Add a reference to CalculatorImplementation_1.dll (or dynamically load it)
namespace Calculator
{
using Calculator.Interface;
using Calculator.Implementation;
class MyCalculator
{
void CalculateSomething()
{
List<Object> list = new List<Object>();
list.Add(1);
list.Add(2);
list.Add("SomeString");
ICalculator calculator = new CalculatorImplementation_1();
int result = calculator.DoCalculus(list);
Console.Write(result);
}
}
}
I've generated a code base for service communication from a WSDL file which resulted in around 100 classes containing the following:
public class SomeClass {
private string _someVar;
public string SomeVar {
get { return _someVar; }
set { _someVar = value; }
}
}
Is it possible to automagically turn everyone of them into auto properties? Maybe using ReSharper or some regex magic?
If you just need to do this once, you can let R# do it for you with a Code Cleanup action.
Right-click on the project (or solution, or single source file), select "Cleanup code..." and then use profile which includes "Use auto-property, if possible." (If you don't have such a profile already, you can edit your profiles from that dialog.)
However, I would strongly advise you to separate generated code from hand-written code. Make all your generated code use partial types (and potentially partial methods) - that way you can create a hand-written partial type which merges with the auto-generated code, without being in the same file. You don't need to look at the generated code, and you can replace it with another version later without worrying about any custom changes.
The following Visual Studio regex will find the pattern you have above when plugged into the "Find & Replace" tool.
private:Wh*:i:Wh*:i;:Wh*public:Wh*(:i):Wh*(:i):Wh*\{:Wh*get:Wh*\{[^\}]*\}:Wh*set:Wh*\{[^\}]*\}:Wh*\}
And this pattern will do the replace.
public \1 \2 { get; set; }
I have to be able to connect to two different versions of the an API (1.4 and 1.5), lets call it the Foo API. And my code that connects to the API and processes the results is substantially duplicated - the only difference is the data types returned from the two APIs. How can I refactor this to remove duplication?
In Foo14Connector.cs (my own class that calls the 1.4 API)
public class Foo14Connector
{
public void GetAllCustomers()
{
var _foo = new Foo14WebReference.FooService();
Foo14WebReference.customerEntity[] customers = _foo.getCustomerList;
foreach (Foo14WebReference.customerEntity customer in customers)
{
GetSingleCustomer(customer);
}
}
public void GetSingleCustomer(Foo14WebReference.customerEntity customer)
{
var id = customer.foo_id;
// etc
}
}
And in the almost exact duplicate class Foo15Connector.cs (my own class that calls the 1.5 API)
public class Foo15Connector
{
public void GetAllCustomers()
{
var _foo = new Foo15WebReference.FooService();
Foo15WebReference.customerEntity[] customers = _foo.getCustomerList;
foreach (Foo15WebReference.customerEntity customer in customers)
{
GetSingleCustomer(customer);
}
}
public void GetSingleCustomer(Foo15WebReference.customerEntity customer)
{
var id = customer.foo_id;
// etc
}
}
Note that I have to have two different connectors because one single method call (out of hundreds) on the API has a new parameter in 1.5.
Both classes Foo14WebReference.customerEntity and Foo15WebReference.customerEntity have identical properties.
If the connectors are in different projects, this is an easy situation to solve:
Add a new class file, call it ConnectorCommon and copy all of the common code, but with the namespaces removed. Make this class a partial class and rename the class (not the file) to something like Connector.
You will need to add a link to this to each project.
Next, remove all of the code from your current connector classes, rename the class (not necessarily the file) to the same as the partial class, and add a using statement that references the namespace.
This should get what you are looking for.
So, when you are done you will have:
File ConnectorCommon:
public partial class Connector
{
public void GetAllCustomers()
{
var _foo = new FooService();
customerEntity[] customers = _foo.getCustomerList;
foreach (customerEntity customer in customers)
{
GetSingleCustomer(customer);
}
}
public void GetSingleCustomer(customerEntity customer)
{
var id = customer.foo_id;
// etc
}
}
File Magento15Connector
using Foo15WebReference;
partial class Connector
{
}
File Magento14Connector
using Foo14WebReference;
partial class Connector
{
}
Update
This process can be a little confusing at first.
To clarify, you are sharing source code in a common file between two projects.
The actual classes are the specific classes with the namespaces in each project. You use the partial keyword to cause the common file to be combined with the actual project file (i.e. Magneto14) in each project to create the full class within that project at compile time.
The trickiest part is adding the common file to both projects.
To do this, select the Add Existing Item... menu in the second project, navigate to the common file and click the right-arrow next to the Add button.
From the dropdown menu, select Add as link. This will add a reference to the file to the second project. The source code will be included in both projects and any changes to the common file will be automatically available in both projects.
Update 2
I sometimes forget how easy VB makes tasks like this, since that is my ordinary programming environment.
In order to make this work in C#, there is one more trick that has to be employed: Conditional compilation symbols. It makes the start of the common code a little more verbose than I would like, but it still ensures that you can work with a single set of common code.
To employ this trick, add a conditional compilation symbol to each project (ensure that it is set for All Configurations). For example, in the Magento14 project, add Ver14 and in the Magento15 project add Ver15.
Then in the common file, replace the namespace with a structure similar to the following:
#if Ver14
using Magneto14;
namespace Magento14Project
#elif Ver15
using Magneto15;
namespace Magento15Project
#endif
This will ensure that the proper namespace and usings are included based on the project the common code is being compiled into.
Note that all common using statements should be retained in the common file (i.e., enough to get it to compile).
If the FooConnectors are not sealed and you are in control to create new instances, then you can derive your own connectors and implement interfaces at the same time. In c# you can implement members by simply inheriting them from a base class!
public IFooConnector {
void GetAllCustomers();
}
public MyFoo14Connector : Foo14Connector, IFooConnector
{
// No need to put any code in here!
}
and then
IFooConnector connector = new MyFoo14Connector();
connector.GetAllCustomers();
You should introduce an interface that is common to both of the implementations. If the projects are written in the same language and are in different projects, you can introduce a common project that both projects reference. You are then making a move towards having dependencies only on your interface which should allow you to swap in different implementations behind the scenes somewhere using inversion of control (google, dependency injection or service locator or factory pattern).
Difficulties for you could be:
1) Public static methods in the implementations are not able to be exposed staticly via an interface
2) Potentially have code in one implementation class ie Foo14Connector or Foo15Connector that doesnt make sense to put into a generic interface