So, I've been searching around on the internet for a bit, trying to see if someone has already invented the wheel here. What I want to do is write an integration test that will parse the current project, find all references to a certain method, find it's arguments, and then check the database for that argument. For example:
public interface IContentProvider
{
ContentItem GetContentFor(string descriptor);
}
public class ContentProvider : IContentProvider
{
public virtual ContentItem GetContentFor(string descriptor)
{
// Fetches Content from Database for descriptor and returns in
}
}
Any other class will get an IContentProvider injected into their constructor using IOC, such that they could write something like:
contentProvider.GetContentFor("SomeDescriptor");
contentProvider.GetContentFor("SomeOtherDescriptor");
Basically, the unit test finds all these references, find the set of text ["SomeDescriptor", "SomeOtherDescriptor"], and then I can check the database to make sure I have rows defined for those descriptors. Furthermore, the descriptors are hard coded.
I could make an enum value for all descriptors, but the enum would have thousands of possible options, and that seems like kinda a hack.
Now, this link on SO: How I can get all reference with Reflection + C# basically says it's impossible without some very advanced IL parsing. To clarify; I don't need Reflector or anything - it's just to be an automated test I can run so that if any other developers on my team check in code that calls for this content without creating the DB record, the test will fail.
Is this possible? If so, does anyone have a resource to look at or sample code to modify?
EDIT: Alternatively, perhaps a different method of doing this VS trying to find all references? The end result is I want a test to fail when the record doesnt exist.
This will be very difficult: your program may compute the value of the descriptor, which will mean your test is able to know which value are possible without executing said code.
I would suggest to change the way you program here, by using an enum type, or coding using the type safe enum pattern. This way, each and every use of a GetContentFor will be safe: the argument is part of the enum, and the languages type checker performs the check.
Your test can then easily iterate on the different enum fields, and check they are all declared in your database, very easily.
Adding a new content key requires editing the enum, but this is a small inconvenient you can live with, as it help a log ensuring all calls are safe.
Related
Let's say we have a custom attribute:
[Precondition(1, "Some precondition")]
This would implement [Test, Order(1), Description("Some precondition")]
Can I access and modify the Order attribute (or create one) for this method?
I can modify the Description and Author, but Order is not a possibility.
I have tried
1: context.Test.Properties["Order"][0] = order;
2:method.CustomAttributes.GetEnumerator()
by walking the stack frames with
Object[] attributes = method.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(PreconditionAttribute), false);
if (attributes.Length >= 1){...}
3:
OrderAttribute orderAttribute = (OrderAttribute)Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(i, typeof(OrderAttribute));
orderAttribute.Order = _order;
Which is readonly.
If I try orderAttribute.Order = new OrderAttribute(myOrd), it doesn't do anything.
I have two answers to choose from. One is in the vein of "Don't do this" and the other is about how to do it. Just for fun, I'm putting both answers up, separately, so they can compete with one another. This one is about why I don't think this is a good idea.
It's easy enough to write either
[Test, Order(1), Description("xxx")] or the equivalent...
[Test(Description="xxx"), Order(1)]
The proposed attribute gives users a second way to specify order, making it possible to assign two different orders to a test. Which of two attributes will win the day depends on (1) how each one is implemented, (2) the order in which the attributes are listed and (3) the platform on which you are running. For all practical purposes, it's non-deterministic.
Keeping the two things separate allows devs to decide which they need independently... which is why NUnit keeps them separate.
Using the standard attributes means that the devs can rely on the nunit documentation to tell them what the attributes do. If you implement your own attribute, you should document what it does in itself as well as what it does in the presence of the standard attributes... As stated above, that's difficult to predict.
I know this isn't a real answer in SO terms, but it's not pure opinion either. There are real technical issues in providing the kind of solution you want. I'd love to see what people think of it in comparison with "how to" I'm going to post next.
See my prior answer first! If you really want to do this, here's the how-to...
In order to combine the action of two existing attributes, you need equivalent code to those two attributes.
In this case both are extremely simple and both have about the same amount of code. DescriptionAttribute is based on PropertyAttribute so some of its code is hidden. OrderAttribute has a bit more logic because it checks to make sure the order has not already been set. Ultimately, both of them have code that implements the IApplyToTest interface.
Because they are both simple, I would copy the code, in order to avoid relying on implementation details that could change. Start with the slightly more complete OrderAttribute. Change its name. Modify the ApplyToTest method to set the description. You're done!
It will look something like this, depending on the names you use for properties...
public void ApplyToTest(Test test)
{
if (!test.Properties.ContainsKey(PropertyNames.Order))
test.Properties.Set(PropertyNames.Order, Order);
test.Properties.Set(PropertyNames.Description, Description);
}
A comment on what you tried...
There is no reason to think that creating an attribute in your code will do anything. NUnit has no way to know about those attributes. Your attribute cannot modify the code so that the test magically has other attributes. The only way Attributes communicate with NUnit is by having their interfaces (like IApplyToTest) called. And only attributes actually present in the code will receive such a call.
Task:
Rip through all the code in the entire solution and wrap all webservice method-calls in another ws method-call that accepts a GUID (it's a login scenario)
Background :
Hundreds of web services, add token security. As explained to me when I was assigned to the task, we do it this way because if, in the future , some changes to security etc have to be made we can just do it in the WrappermethodClass in stead of having to change hundreds of web services
Tried and failed :
Find all references : too much data , returned more than 1000 hits , most of which are useless as they're only object references.
Rename WS so all references beak, build the project I'm working on and fix as I go : works well with the services not integral to the functionality but as soon as I do it with an important one it's like I shot the Solution through the brain, everything's f****d and and VS just gives up trying.
Current Solution :Open all relevant docs, Find ,select All Open Docs, skip through.
Question : How do I do this as efficiently as possible?
Code (before) :
wsGeneric wsGen = new wsGeneric();
wsGen.DoSomething();
Code (after) :
WrapperMethodClass.DoCheck takes params of (Action, GUID),
wsGeneric wsGen = new wGeneric();
wrapperMethodClass.DoCheck((g) =>
{ wsGen.UserInfo.token = g.ToString();
wsGen.DoSomething();
},Shell.token.Value);
Don´t you have some sort of interface or class where you changed the method signature already?
If you changed your webservice and your Code still compiles i´d say you did something wrong or i don´t understand the question.
Update:
I still don´t get it.
I think you have these options:
Change the method signature (all calls should be broken now, fix all the errors vs gives you and you should be done)
Find all references (of the method, not your webservice-class) and change the calls
If above isn´t possible use "Find in Files" and search for the method-name
If all your webservices inherit from an interface or base class you can refactor this method to add a parameter, all inheriting classes will also have the parameter.
If you pass a login object to each webservice, you can add a GUID element to this object and you're done.
It would be a lot easier if you showed us some code, some function interfaces that you have to change and how.
A better solution may be to just use PostSharp to add the checks to your services. This will solve your business problem (you only need to update your aspects) and is much less error prone then your current approach since you don't have to wory about some new developer forgetting to make the call to DoCheck.
Not having to find all references is a side benefit.
What will be the Regular Expression to get all the property and variables names of any class in c#, I want to parse the *.cs file. that is i want to select any *.cs file as input and it should get the property name of that selected class, as an output.
can any one help!!!....would appreciate for any help i tried very much but not got the actual result every time class name is coming instead of property.
thanks
Jack
There's no way you're going to be able to get exactly what you want with a regular expression because you need semantic context, not just string parsing.
For example, a good first attempt at finding all of the field and property definitions in a C# file might go something like this
^\s*(?:(?:private|public|protected|internal)\s+)?(?:static\s+)?(?:readonly\s+)?(\w+)\s+(\w+)\s*[^(]
That will match properties (public int Foo {...}) and fields (private int foo;) but not methods (protected void Bar()).
The problem is that a regex engine has no concept of the context within which those tokens appear. It will match both foo and bar in this code:
int foo;
void Stuff()
{
int bar;
}
If you happen to know that your code file follows some coding standards, you may have more luck. For example, if you enforce a style rule that all class members must have access specifiers, then you can make the private/public/etc part of that regex non-optional; since those are only permitted at the class level, it will filter out local variables.
There are other options, none of them too attractive at first glance. There is persistent talk from the C# dev team about exposing the C# compiler as a service in some future version of .NET, which would be perfect here, but I wouldn't expect that any time soon. You could purchase a third-party C# parser/analyzer like this one (caveat: I have zero experience with that, it's just the first Google hit). You could try compiling the .cs file using csc and examining the IL, but you'd need to know all of the third-party references.
the application is very large so giving a brief back ground and the problem
when the user logs in, a button is displayed having the text of the function he is allowed to call.
the function he is allowed is mapped in the database table
its made sure that the name of the actual function is same to the ones used in the db.
problem
the name is extracted, and stored as text field of button and also in a string variable.
now how am i supposed to call this function using the string variable which has the name stored in it!
like we type
name-of-function();
but here i dont know the name, the string at run time does so i cant write like
string()!!?
You will need to use reflection to do this. Here is a rough sketch of what you need to do:
// Get the Type on which your method resides:
Type t = typeof(SomeType);
// Get the method
MethodInfo m = t.GetMethod("methodNameFromDb");
// Invoke dynamically
m.Invoke(instance, null);
Depending on your actual needs you will have to modify this a little - lookup the used methods and types on MSDN: MethodInfo, Invoke
Well, no matter what you do, there is going to have to be some kind of mapping done between a database "function" and your "real" function. You can probably use Reflection using your Types and MethodInfo.
However, this sounds like a maintenance nightmare. It also sounds like you are reinventing user roles or the like. I would be very cautious about going down this path - I think it will be much more complex and problematic than you think.
Basically what I'm hoping for is something that would work like how the Obsolete attribute works with Intellisense and strikes the method text when typing out the name. What I'm looking for is an attribute that blocks the method from being seen with the assembly it's defined. Kind of like an reverse internal. Using 3.5 by the by.
Yeah sounds odd but if you need the reason why, here it is:
My current solution for lazy loading in entity framework involves having the generated many to one or one to one properties be internal and have a facade? property that is public and basically loads the internal property's value:
public ChatRoom ParentRoom
{
get
{
if(!ParentRoomInnerReference.IsLoaded)
{
ParentRoomInnerReference.Load();
}
return ParentRoomInner;
}
set
{
ParentRoomInner = value;
}
}
Problem with this is if someone tries to use the ParentRoom property in a query:
context.ChatItem.Where(item => item.ParentRoom.Id = someId)
This will blow up since it doesn't know what to do with the facade property when evaluating the expression. This isn't a huge problem since the ParentRoomInner property can be used and queries are only in the entity assembly. (IE no selects and such in the UI assembly) The only situation comes in the entity assembly since it can see both properties and it's possible that someone might forget and use the above query and blow up at runtime.
So it would be nice if there were an attribute or some way to stop the entity assembly from seeing (ie blocked by intellisense) the outward facing properties.
Basically inside the assembly see ParentRoomInner. Outside the assembly see ParentRoom. Going to guess this isn't possible but worth a try.
I do see that there is an attribute
for stopping methods from being
viewable
(System.ComponentModel.EditorBrowsable)
but it's choices are rather slim and
don't really help.
You can use the EditorBrowsableAttribute for this:
[System.ComponentModel.EditorBrowsable(System.ComponentModel.EditorBrowsableState.Never)]
public void MyMethod() {}
One thing to know, though: In c#, you will still get intellisense on the method if it is in the same assembly as the one you are working in. Someone referencing your assembly (or your project, for a project reference) will not see it though. You can also pass EditorBrowsableState.Advanced, and then you will only get intellisense if c# if you clear the HideAdvancedMembers option in Tools Options.
I haven't heard of a good way to do this in plain .NET. But, here are some ideas. Maybe one of them will work, or set you off in a direction that will be helpful.
Use FxCop, probably writing your own rule to make sure ParentRoom isn't called from the asslembly that defined it.
Look into the various post-processing projects for .NET (link design-by-contract).
Write some code inside your ParentRoom getter which will check the stack (using "new Stack()" or "new StackFrame(1)" to figure out whether the caller was from the same assembly. If so, either throw an exception or simply return ParentRoomInner.