Develop Reference

Why does "dynamic" require language-specific runtime components?

Microsoft.CSharp is required to use dynamic feature.
I understand there are binders, evaluators and helpers in the assembly.
But why it has to be language-specific?
Why Microsoft.CSharp and not Microsoft.Dynamic or System.Dynamic?
Please, explain.
Let's say we have d.x where d is dynamic.
C# compiler
1. applies C# language rules
2. gets "property or field access"
3. emits (figurally) Binder.GetPropertyOrField(d, "x")
Now, being asked to reference Microsoft.CSharp may make one think that language-agnostic binder can't handle this case, and C#-only something got its way through compilation and requires special library.
Compiler had a bad day?

To your first question, it is language-specific because it needs to be.
In C# you call a method with too many arguments and you get an error. In Javascript, the extra arguments are simply ignored. In C# you access a member that doesn't exist and get an error, while in Javascript you get undefined. Even if you discovered all these varying feature sets and put it all into System.Core, the next language fad of the month is sure to have some super neat feature that it wouldn't support. It's better to be flexible.
There is common code in .NET core, under the System.Dynamic and System.Runtime.CompilerServices namespaces. It just can't all be common.
And as for your second question, the need for the "special C# library" could of course be removed by transforming these language-specific behaviors inline, but why? That will needlessly bloat your IL code size. It is the same reasoning for you not writing your own Int32.Parse every time you need to read in a number.

One reason I can think of - Visual Basic.NET has had late binding in it from day one, primarily oriented around how it interoperates with COM IDispatch interfaces - so if they wanted a language agnostic binder, they'd have had to adopt the Visual Basic rules - which includes that member lookup only works with Public members.
Apparently, the C# designers didn't want to be so strict. You can call this class' DoStuff method from C# via a dynamic reference:
public class Class1
{
internal void DoStuff()
{
Console.WriteLine("Hello");
}
}
Whereas attempting to call the same via Visual Basic's Object results in a MissingMemberException at runtime.
So because the C# designers weren't the first to arrive at the late-binding party, they could either follow Visual Basic's lead or they could say "each language will have its own rules" - they went with the latter.

Separating Designers from Main Assembly

Background
I am converting the TreeViewAdv(TVA) project on SourceForge to vb.net. Thus far I have successfully converted the code, successfully built it, added a reference of the dll to a new project, added the control to the toolbox, added the control to a form, and modified the controls properties. I have also coded functionality into the form prior to building that accepted the Aga.Controls namespace.
The Problem
When I go to debug the application that I have placed the TVA control in, I get the error: ''Aga' is not declared. It may be inaccessible due to its protection level.' on all calls to that namespace. So, I researched this problem on SourceForge and there is a thread here: https://sourceforge.net/p/treeviewadv/discussion/568369/thread/005e61ef/ that discusses this issue. Supposedly somebody figured out what the problem is when you are seeing behavior like this, but failed to share any details of their wisdom. The general issue is that when referencing a dll compiled in 2008 in a 2010 project 'is that VS 2010 requires you have Designers separate from the main assembly.' I tried contacting people there, but there seem to be no real activity on any thread in the forum at all. That leads me to my first question...
The Question(s)
1.) Hoping beyond hope, is there anybody on StackOverflow that has successfully done this for the treeviewadv project specifically? If so, I would really appreciate either a somewhat detailed description of what was done, or a short description with the final resulting code/fix. While I understand this is highly unlikely, I thought I would ask before asking more general questions on 'how to'?
2.) Barring anybody that fits the bill for number 1, is there anybody that has knowledge of this general process and at least enough knowledge of the TVA project and desire to work with me on this endeavor?
2.) Barring 1 and 2, is there anybody that has done this with any project and can either describe the general process in relative detail, and/or point to example code?
3.) Barring 1, 2 and 3, is there a particularly good resource that I can access that outlines how to update a VS2008 project in the manner described above?
Disclaimer
I understand that this process might be too involved to discuss here, so am willing to take the discussion/effort elsewhere if needed. If someone of category 1 or 2 can (answer my question/work with me on this) and you feel the discussion should be taken elsewhere please inform me as to how we can contact each other as there seems to be no formal mechanism on S.O.. I am still interested in posting (or linking) the results here for all to share if an answer can be found.

Here is a bit more info addressing the general issue of a Designer in a different assembly. There are some caveats: first I (we?) are not sure that the core problem as to do with a UI Designer. Given the project appears to be a custom TreeView, it seems likely to be the case, but the term 'Designer' could be used in a more generic fashion for this control. A second caveat is that all I have to go on is the description above and havent seen the code for the control.
That said, I am just finishing a drop in UnDo Manager component (ie it inherits from Component and sits in the form tray). Part of what it needed was a way for the dev to select controls on the form to be subject to UnDo. The layout/construction is this:
Imports Plutonix.UIDesigners
Namespace Plutonix.UnDoMgr
Public Class UndoManager
Inherits Component
Implements ISupportInitialize
Private _TgtControls As New Collection(Of Control)
<EditorAttribute(GetType(UnDoControlCollectionUIEditor), _
GetType(System.Drawing.Design.UITypeEditor))> _
<DesignerSerializationVisibility(DesignerSerializationVisibility.Content)> _
Public Property UnDoTargets() As Collection(Of Control)
Get
Return _TgtControls
End Get
Set(ByVal value As Collection(Of Control))
If value IsNot Nothing Then
_TgtControls = value
Else
_TgtControls.Clear()
End If
End Set
End Property
'...
The <EditorAttribute... decoration specifies that this component uses a special designer called UnDoControlCollectionUIEditor. If the project you are converting does not have this on one or more properties, the issue may not be related to UI designers.
Later, there is the UI editor for the COntrols collection editor. This is a separate class though it is in the same file:
<System.Security.Permissions.PermissionSetAttribute( _
System.Security.Permissions.SecurityAction.Demand, Name:="FullTrust")> _
Public Class UnDoControlCollectionUIEditor
Inherits ControlCollectionUIEditor
Public Sub New()
MyBase.bExcludeForm = True
MyBase.bExcludeSelf = True
' create a list of supported control TYPES
typeList.Add(GetType(TextBox))
'... 9 more lines adding control types to List(of System.Type)
End Sub
End Class
Nearly all the code resides in the base class ControlCollectionUIEditor which is in a different assembly (a DLL). My component though is actually using one defined locally, so as a test, I changed the editor to use to ControlCollectionUIEditor which is the base class in my designer DLL. Labels, panels, GroupBoxes etc dont have/need UnDo capability so my Designer exempts them from showing in the Designer - when I use the base class, they all show up in the designer list as expected.
ALL the standard UI Editors (String Collection Editor and the like) are in NET assemblies, so are defined in one assembly and used in another (yours/ours/the devs). A few years ago, I decided to put several different UIDesigners I had written into a UIDesigner.DLL (ie their own assembly) and they worked fine.
Beyond that, I am confused on some specifics. It sounds like you are trying to use this 2008 assembly (a DLL?) in your conversion. Is that where the designer is? If so, it is already in another assembly from your VS 2010 project, so why is there an issue? Can the whole thing be avoided by also converting whatever is in this 2008 assembly (still not clear on what is in it).
HTH
EDIT
I had a quick look at the source, and it is using at least 1 UIDesigner. TreeViewAdv.Properties.cs defines NodeControlCollectionEditor as a custom controls collection editor for the NodeControls property. The Editor is in NodeControlsCollection.cs. Coincidentally, it is doing EXACTLY what my UnDoManager does: define what control types are valid for a CollectionEditor. Your thing then calls the standard NET CollectionEditor, mine calls the CodeProject DialogForm version. There is also a StringCollectionEditor.cs file but I cant tell if that is a UI Designer or something for the user at runtime.
Since you have the code for these, you should be able to mimic something like what I did above. I would also verify that VS 2010 does indeed have the quirk mentioned. But I am also confused what is in the 2008 assembly. Is there some piece that you dont have the source for? You might also try adding the security attribute to any UI Designers in the project since the CS version does not have them and the msg quoted indicates something about 'protection level'. It seems unlikely to help, but since you are dealing with a quirk, who knows...?
Also, that is a pretty ambitious conversion project!

Cause of Problem Verified
First, I would like to point out that indeed, the issue of losing track of the namespace in the referenced dll was because of the presence of custom UI editor/designers in that dll.
The Fix
The general process of separating Custom Editors/Designers from a 'primary' class library is this:
1.) Find all custom editors/designers in the project. If you are only somewhat familiar with the project, a good way to do that is to Find (Ctrl + F) 'UITypeEditor' in the entire solution. If you are the one who designed it, then you should have no problem.
2.) Delete or comment out the entire custom editors/designers class(es). I prefer commenting out for easy documentation (just in case you need to go back).
3.) Create new project in solution. If you cannot see the solution (i.e. you can only see the project) go to tools-->options-->Projects and Solutions. There you will see a check box that says 'Always show solution'. After revealing the solution, right click and select add-->New Project... Can be named whatever, that will have little to no effect on the code.
4.) Within the new project rename Class1 to whatever is convenient. Transfer all 'using' statements at the top of the files that originally held the custom editor/designer classes. EDIT: Add using statements for any namespaces that would allow you to access the types needed from the primary project. Declare the appropriate namespace for each class. Copy and paste custom classes into correct namespaces (You can, if you want, place ALL of your custom editor/designers in this one file). Change any classes that are declared as 'internal' to 'public' (internal is only the scope of the assembly).
5.) If the new project requires any references, add those now. If your custom editor is editing custom types, you will likely need a reference to the project that defines those types. If those types are defined in your 'primary' assembly this can get a bit tricky as it could cause a circular reference issue. One way to get around this, and probably the right way, is to remove the declaration of those types from your primary assembly and create a new project/assembly just for their declaration. If they are, for some reason, inseparable from your primary assembly, set aside a successful build (dll) previously made of you primary assembly and reference that. This reduces future sustainability of code as those types may chance, but gets the job done now if that is what you want.
6.) After debugging the custom editor/designer project, build it and add that project's build (dll) as reference in the primary project/assembly.
7.) Debug internally, create a new project in solution and add BOTH dlls (Primary and Custom Editor) to the references. Verify controls/properties behave as they are supposed to in both design time AND run time.
8.) Finally, debug externally. Create new solution, reference both dlls, verify functionality. It may seem overkill to debug in both the native solution and externally, but I found many differences in behavior between the environments. Be thorough.
Important Note: I spent a LONG time figuring that both dlls needed to be added. You see, when adding just the primary dll to the test project, it would act as though BOTH were added. I though this was reasonable (& quite dandy) as the primary assembly references the other assembly. However, close and open Visual Studio and it does not work. Long story short add BOTH dlls.
TreeViewAdv Specifics
1.) There were two Custom UIEditors. The first is in NodeControlsCollection.cs called NodeControlCollectionEditor, which inherits the standard .NET CollectionEditor. The only functionality added was the explicit assigning of what kind of controls the editor is allowed to work with. It seems this was largely done as a workaround to allow ALL NodeControl types to be added to the collection (this required the passing of type NodeControl), but get around the fact that passing the NodeControl type causes an error because you cannot instantiate an abstract type. The second is StringCollectionEditor in StringCollectionEditor.cs. This also inherets the standard .NET CollectionEditor and adds a little functionality (Not sure of the purpose).
2 - 4.) Same as the general process.
5.) I currently had to use the latter method (setting aside a dll of Aga.Controls for my custom UIEditor to reference). Later I hope to separate some of the object declarations from the primary assembly to make the solution more reliable.
6 - 8.) The original bug (losing the aga namespace) did not occur when running the testing application inside the same solution (even if different project). Additionally, some fixes that worked externally did not run correctly internally and vise-versa. Thus, my advice for testing in both environments.
Final Request
While both the general and specifics of my question is answered here, Plutonix's help was vital in my coming to the solution. While I am marking this as the answer. I would like if people also upvote Plutonix's answer given the effort that he has put forth in helping me find the answer (in addition to the fact that his answer is also correct if less specific).
EDIT: The process outlined above worked when I was modifying the original TVA C# code. I was even able to reference and successfully use the resulting DLLs in a VB.net project. When I tried to apply the same process to the TVA code line that I had converted into VB.net, it resulted in the same problem that I started with. Everything works until I go to run the application and then it loses sight of the aga namespace.
EDIT SOLUTION: Go to properties (of project losing reference)--> Compile tab --> Advanced Compile Options button. Under target framework, change to ".NET Framework 4" if not so already. If that value is already selected, you are likely looking at a different cause.

In C# (VS-2010), is there a way to fail a frontend build if a certain library class is used? (When normally it would compile just fine?)

I'm writing a library that has a bunch of classes in it which are intended to be used by multiple frontends (some frontends share the same classes). For each frontend, I am keeping a hand edited list of which classes (of a particular namespace) it uses. If the frontend tries to use a class that is not in this list, there will be runtime errors. My goal is to move these errors to compile time.
If any of you are curious, these are 'mapped' nhibernate classes. I'm trying to restrict which frontend can use what so that there is less spin up time, and just for my own sanity. There's going to be hundreds of these things eventually, and it will be really nice if there's a list somewhere that tells me which frontends use what that I'm forced to maintain. I can't seem to get away with making subclasses to be used by each frontend and I can't use any wrapper classes... just take that as a given please!
Ideally, I want visual studio to underline red the offending classes if someone dares to try and use them, with a nice custom error in the errors window. I also want them GONE from the intellisense windows. Is it possible to customize a project to do these things?
I'm also open to using a pre-build program to analyze the code for these sorts of things, although this would not be as nice. Does anyone know of tools that do this?
Thanks
Isaac

Let's say that you have a set of classes F. You want these classes to be visible only to a certain assembly A. Then you segregate these classes in F into a separate assembly and mark them as internal and set the InternalsVisibleTo on that assembly to true for this certain assembly A.
If you try to use these classes from any assembly A' that is not marked as InternalsVisibleTo from the assembly containing F, then you will get a compile-time error if you try to use any class from F in A'.
I also want them GONE from the intellisense windows. Is it possible to customize a project to do these things?
That happens with the solution I presented above as well. They are internal to the assembly containing F and not visible from any assembly A' not marked as InternalsVisibleTo in the assembly containing F.
However, I generally find that InternalsVisibleTo is a code smell (not always, just often).

You should club your classes into separate dlls / projects and only provide access to those dlls to front end projects that are 'appropriate' for it. This should be simple if your front-end and the group of classes it may use are logically related.
If not then I would say some thing smells fishy - probably your class design / approach needs a revisit.

I think you'll want to take a look at the ObsoleteAttribute: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.obsoleteattribute%28v=VS.100%29.aspx
I believe you can set IsError to true and it will issue an error on build time.
(not positive though)
As for the intellisense you can use EditorBrowseableAttribute: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.componentmodel.editorbrowsableattribute.aspx Or at least that is what seems to get decorated when I add a service reference and cannot see the members.

Is it possible to mark a module function as "hidden" from Intellisense discovery?

As a follow up to this question, I am wondering whether it is possible to mark an F# function within a module (presumably via an attribute) as "hidden" from Intellisense. To recap, I have some functions which are marked inline but are implemented in terms of other functions I don't really want to expose. So while the implementation functions must be kept public (since they are being inlined), I remember that in the past I've come across C# methods which were hidden from Visual Studio Intellisense but compiled just fine if you knew what they were, but I don't remember the exact method(s) and am unsure if that was some sort of ad-hoc Visual Studio thing or a usable feature like DebuggerBrowsable(DebuggerBrowsableState.Never) awareness.
Update: I tried applying the EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never) but it doesn't appear to work in Visual F# projects.

I tried to do that recently and I'm pretty sure that F# ignores the EditorBrowsable attribute.
The only way to make declaration disappear from the IntelliSense is to use the ObsoleteAttribute, but that also means you'll get a warning when you actually use the function. This is a bit unfortunate, but it may be okay if you use the function only from some implementation file where you can disable the warning:
Declaration in one file:
module Internal =
[<System.ObsoleteAttribute>]
let foo = 10
Implementation file that disables warnings and uses foo:
// Disable 'obsolete' warning
#nowarn "44"
// 'Internal' is empty (and is not shown in the completion list)
Internal.foo
The attribute can be applied to modules, functions and types, so it is quite flexible.

You can use [EditorBrowsable(EditorBrowsableState.Never)], but this will only work for clients of your assembly that are not in the same solution (i.e. importing your class library as an assembly and not as a Project.) Projects in the same solution will still show the methods in Intellisense.

Visual Studio - smarter word completion wanted

I'd like word completion to show all matching type names (not only those in imported namespaces). If nampespace of that type is not imported - it should be imported as I choose the type from list, and if that type was in the non-referenced assembly - that assembly should be added to project references (adding imports and references - after prompt, of course)
Trying to recollect exact type name and it's namespace is real pain sometimes.
Is there any product with such completion?
(Yes, I know about Resharper. No, it doesn't support this)
PS and it would be really great, if word completion could show all types having text anywhere in the name - not only in the beginning. For example, I type "writer" - and completion shows me all writers (TextWriter, StringWriter, StreamWriter - etc)

You should take a look at ReSharper (Again) it does support the functionality with part of a type name or only writing the capital letters of a camel case type name e.g. SomeType can be found with ST.
The number of assemblies any tool will look in for possible types will always be limited. After all unless you tell the tool about the assemblies (tell in some way as in registering an assembly in the GAC, referencing it or any other means) the tool will simply not know of that assembly at will therfor not search it. On top of that you really do not want the tool to search through to many assemblies since you'd then risk being done writing the full name of any type before the tool will be done searching

Right or wrong, the goal of intellisense is to provide legal completions for the current edit positions. This is by no means 100% accurate but we do strive for listing only valid completions.
Showing type names which are not imported and/or not a type in the assembly the current project references flies in the face of this approach. It is instead suggesting code that is known to be illegal to the user.
True we could then go back and fix this up by adding an assembly reference. But some users may find this very annoying. They are typing up code and suddenly references are added and their imports are changed.
I'm not saying this is necessarily a bad feature, just that it goes against the current design philosophy and has the potential to upset a good portion of users.

What you are looking for is c# reshaper.
Just type something in like MD and press Ctrl+Space it will bring up every standard include. Just press space to confirm(in this case MD5 will show up). It also learns what you use most.

In addition to Resharper, CodeRush also has this feature. The free version probably does too.