Is it possible to get the source code dynamically? Something like this:
Dummy code:
1 int x = 5;
2 string y = "";
3 string codeFromLine1 = SomeClass.SomeMethod("currentfilename", 1)
codeFromLine1 <===> "int x = 5;"
C# compiles to IL; the app that you ship almost certainly won't included the source code in any way, and while IL can be reversed back to C# (with the right tools, assuming it hasn't been deliberately obfuscated), it won't always be the same at the original source and the line numbers won't be meaningful at all. So in general: no. In some very very specific cases: possibly.
If you have access to the original code file
int lineNo = 1;
string codeLine = File.ReadLines(fileNameOfSourceCode)
.Skip(lineNo - 1);
.First();
This might be of some use for a design time tool; however, I don't see what its usage might be at runtime. Note that exceptions yield file names, line numbers and column numbers, if you compile your code in Debug configuration and include the *.PDB file. I might work with the Release configuration as well; however, the code optimizer can confuse things a bit.
Related
I am working on a calculation module using C#, and I bumped on this :
double v = 4 / 100;
I know this is a wrong initialization that returns v = 0.0 instead of v = 0.04
The c# rules says I must ensure at least one of the member is a double, like this :
double v = (double) 4 / 100;
double v = 4.0 / 100;
However, I have many many initializations of that kind that involves integer variables operations, and I feel lazy to browse my code line by line to detect such mistakes.
Instead, is it possible to get warned by the compiler about this ?
Alright, after some playing around and what not, I have a solution. I used this article to come to this solution.I use StyleCop, so you'll need to get and install that. Then, you can download my C# project MathematicsAnalyzer.
First off, I did not account for all type conversion mismatches. In fact, I only accommodate one part.
Basically, I check to see if the line contains "double" followed by a space. I do know that could lead to false warnings, because the end of a class could be double or any number of other things, but I'll leave that to you to figure out how to properly isolate the type.
If a match is found, I check to see that it matches this regex:
double[ ][A-Za-z0-9]*[ ]?=(([ ]?[0-9]*d[ ]?/[ ]?[0-9]*;)|[ ]?[0-9]*[ ]?/[ ]?[0-9]*d;)
If it does -not- match this regex, then I add a violation. What this regex will match on is any of the following:
double i=4d / 100;
double i = 4d / 100;
double i = 4 / 100d;
double i = 4/ 100d;
double i = 4 /100d;
double i = 4/100d;
double i=4d / 100;
double i=4 / 100d;
double i=4/100d;
Any of the above will not create a violation. As it is currently written, pretty much if a 'd' isn't used, it'll throw a violation. You'll need to add extra logic to account for the other possible ways of explicitly casting an operand. As I'm writing this, I've just realized that having a 'd' on both operands will most likely throw an exception. Whoops.
And lastly, I could not get StyleCop to display my violation properly. It kept giving me an error about the rule not existing, and even with a second pair of eyes on it, we could not find a solution, so I hacked it. The error shows the name of the rule you were trying to find, so I just put the name of the rule as something descriptive and included the line number in it.
To install the custom rule, build the MathematicalAnalyzer project. Close Visual Studio and copy the DLL into the StyleCop install directory. When you open Visual Studio, you should see the rule in the StyleCop settings. Step 5 and 6 of the article I used shows where to do that.
This only gets one violation at a time throughout the solution, so you'll have to fix the violation it shows, and run StyleCop again to find the next one. There may be a way around that, but I ran out of juice and stopped here.
Enjoy!
This article explains how to set up custom Code Analysis rules that, when you run Code Analysis, can show warnings and what not.
http://blog.tatham.oddie.com.au/2010/01/06/custom-code-analysis-rules-in-vs2010-and-how-to-make-them-run-in-fxcop-and-vs2008-too/
I have a question. I am testing a lib from me, which is generation some text in xml-style. Up to now, I am testing with the function
Assert.AreEqual(string1, string2);
But the strings, which are in xml-style, are more than 300 characters long. And when I make a little mistake in one character, the test is failing and the output is, that the strings are not equal. But the test does not say, at which position they are not equal.
So my question is: Is there already an implemented function, which compares two strings and tell me also, at which position they differ + output of the strings ... ?
try this way
var indexBroke = 0;
var maxLength = Math.Min(string1.Length, string2.Length);
while (indexBroke < maxLength && string1[indexBroke] == string2[indexBroke]) {
indexBroke++;
}
return ++indexBroke;
the logic is that you compare each character step by step and when you get the first difference the function exit returninng the last index with equal characters
For that reason (and many others more), I can recommend using FluentAssertions.
With FluentAssertions you would formulate your assertion like this:
string1.Should().Be(string2);
In the case the strings do not match, you get a nice informative message helping you to tackle down the problem:
Expected string to be
"<p>Line one<br/>Line two</p>" with a length of 28, but
"<p>Line one<br>Line two</p>" has a length of 27.
Additionally, you can give a reason to make the error message even more clear:
string1.Should().Be(string2, "a multiline-input should have been successfully parsed");
That would give you the following message:
Expected string to be
"<p>Line one<br/>Line two</p>" with a length of 28 because a multiline-input should have been successfully parsed, but
"<p>Line one<br>Line two</p>" has a length of 27.
These reason arguments are especially valuable when comparing values that provide no meaning by themselves, such as booleans and numbers.
BTW, FluentAssertions also helps greatly in comparing object graphs.
From this post (and not only) we got to the point that the ++ operator cannot be applied on expressions returning value.
And it's really obvious that 5++ is better to write as 5 + 1. I just want to summarize the whole thing around the increment/decrement operator. So let's go through these snippets of code that could be helpful to somebody stuck with the ++ first time at least.
// Literal
int x = 0++; // Error
// Constant
const int Y = 1;
double f = Y++; // error. makes sense, constants are not variables actually.
int z = AddFoo()++; // Error
Summary: ++ works for variables, properties (through a synthetic sugar) and indexers(the same).
Now the interest part - any literal expressions are optimized in CSC and, hence when we write, say
int g = 5 + 1; // This is compiled to 6 in IL as one could expect.
IL_0001: ldc.i4.6 // Pushes the integer value of 6 onto the evaluation stack as an int32.
For 5++ doesn't mean 5 becomes 6, it could be a shorthand for 5 + 1, like for x++ = x + 1
What's the real reason behind this restriction?
int p = Foo()++ //? yes you increase the return value of Foo() with 1, what's wrong with that?
Examples of code that can lead to logical issues are appreciated.
One of real-life example could be, perform one more actions than in the array.
for (int i = 0; i < GetCount()++; i++) { }
Maybe the lack of usage opts compiler teams to avoid similar features?
I don't insist this is a feature we lack of, just want to understand the dark side of this for compiler writers perhaps, though I'm not. But I know c++ allows this when returning a reference in the method. I'm neither a c++ guy(very poor knowledge) just want to get the real gist of the restriction.
Like, is it just because c# guys opted to restrict the ++ over value expressions or there are definite cases leading to unpredictable results?
In order for a feature to be worth supporting, it really needs to be useful. The code you've presented is in every case less readable than the alternative, which is just to use the normal binary addition operator. For example:
for (int i = 0; i < GetCount() + 1; i++) { }
I'm all in favour of the language team preventing you from writing unreadable code when in every case where you could do it, there's a simpler alternative.
Well before using these operators you should try to read up on how they do what they do. In particular you should understand the difference between postfix and prefix, which could help figure out what is and isn't allowed.
The ++ and -- operators modify their operands. Which means that the operand must be modifiable. If you can assign a value to the expression in question then it is modifiable, and is probably a variable(c#).
Taking a look at what these operators actually do. The postfix operators should increment after your line of code executes. As for the prefix operators, well they would need to have access to the value before the method had even been called yet. The way I read the syntax is ++lvalue (or ++variable) converting to memory operations:[read, write, read] or for lvalue++ [read, read, write] Though many compilers probably optimize secondary reads.
So looking at foo()++; the value is going to be plopped dead in the center of executing code. Which would mean the compiler would need to save the value somewhere more long-term in order for operations to be performed on said value, after the line of code has finished executing. Which is no doubt the exact reason C++ does not support this syntax either.
If you were to be returning a reference the compiler wouldn't have any trouble with the postfix. Of course in C# value types (ie. int, char, float, etc) cannot be passed by reference as they are value types.
Does ASP, C#, VB.NET have a way to retrieve what line its on in code as its processing commands?
Example
1 <%
2 response.write("Your on line " & retreiveCurrentLineNumber)
3 %>
Output: Your on line 2
You can do this:
var line = new StackFrame(0, true).GetFileLineNumber();
Note there are several caveats to this.
You will need to make sure the source file and PDB are reachable.
This will get you the current line of the method you are in, not exactly where you are.
The Jit may perform optimizations that result in incorrect information, such as a method being inlined.
For VB.NET it's the same thing:
Dim line As Integer = New StackFrame(0, True).GetFileLineNumber()
As far as Classic ASP goes - I don't believe this is possible.
While vcsjones answer may be exactly what you're looking for, for the purposes of debugging/troubleshooting VB.NET you may want to take a look at the Erl property of the Err object. It returns an integer indicating the line number of the last executed statement - and by line number, that means a numeric label, not the physical line number of the source file.
Peppering one's code with line numbers at critical points is helpful at troubleshooting the unexpected exceptions, and one doesn't need the source file and PDB to make Erl work.
I'm a student and I got a homework i need some minor help with =)
Here is my task:
Write an application that prompts the user to enter the size of a square and display a square of asterisks with the sides equal with entered integer. Your application works for side’s size from 2 to 16. If the user enters a number less than 2 or greater then 16, your application should display a square of size 2 or 16, respectively, and an error message.
This is how far I've come:
start:
int x;
string input;
Console.Write("Enter a number between 2-16: ");
input = Console.ReadLine();
x = Int32.Parse(input);
Console.WriteLine("\n");
if (x <= 16 & x >= 2)
{
control statement
code
code
code
}
else
{
Console.WriteLine("You must enter a number between 2 and 16");
goto start;
}
I need help with...
... what control statment(if, for, while, do-while, case, boolean) to use inside the "if" control.
My ideas are like...
do I write a code that writes out the boxes for every type of number entered? That's a lot of code...
..there must be a code containing some "variable++" that could do the task for me, but then what control statement suits the task best?
But if I use a "variable++" how am I supposed to write the spaces in the output, because after all, it has to be a SQUARE?!?! =)
I'd love some suggestions on what type of statements to use, or maybe just a hint, of course not the whole solution as I am a student!
It's not the answer you're looking for, but I do have a few suggestions for clean code:
Your use of Int32.Parse is a potential exception that can crash the application. Look into Int32.TryParse (or just int.TryParse, which I personally think looks cleaner) instead. You'll pass it what it's parsing and an "out" parameter of the variable into which the value should be placed (in this case, x).
Try not to declare your variables until you actually use them. Getting into the habit of declaring them all up front (especially without instantiated values) can later lead to difficult to follow code. For my first suggestions, x will need to be declared ahead of time (look into default in C# for default instantiation... it's, well, by default, but it's good information to understand), but the string doesn't need to be.
Try to avoid using goto when programming :) For this code, it would be better to break out the code which handles the value and returns what needs to be drawn into a separate method and have the main method just sit around and wait for input. Watch for hard infinite loops, though.
It's never too early to write clean and maintainable code, even if it's just for a homework assignment that will never need to be maintained :)
You do not have to write code for every type of number entered. Instead, you have to use loops (for keyword).
Probably I must stop here and let you do the work, but I would just give a hint: you may want to do it with two loops, one embedded in another.
I have also noted some things I want to comment in your code:
Int32.Parse: do not use Int32, but int. It will not change the meaning of your code. I will not explain why you must use int instead: it is quite difficult to explain, and you would understand it later for sure.
Avoid using goto statement, except if you were told to use it in the current case by your teacher.
Console.WriteLine("\n");: avoid "\n". It is platform dependent (here, Linux/Unix; on Windows it's "\r\n", and on MacOS - "\n\r"). Use Environment.NewLine instead.
x <= 16 & x >= 2: why & and not ||?
You can write string input = Console.ReadLine(); instead of string input; followed by input = Console.ReadLine();.
Since it's homework, we can't give you the answer. But here are some hints (assuming solid *'s, not white space in-between):
You're going to want to iterate from 1 to N. See for (int...
There's a String constructor that will allow you to avoid the second loop. Look at all of the various constructors.
Your current error checking does not meet the specifications. Read the spec again.
You're going to throw an exception if somebody enters a non-parsable integer.
goto's went out of style before bell-bottoms. You actually don't need any outer control for the spec you were given, because it's "one shot and go". Normally, you would write a simple console app like this to look for a special value (e.g., -1) and exit when you see that value. In that case you would use while (!<end of input>) as the outer control flow.
If x is greater or equal to 16, why not assign 16 to it (since you'll eventually need to draw a square with a side of length 16) (and add an appropriate message)?
the control statement is:
for (int i = 0; i < x; i++)
{
for ( int j = 0; j < x; j++ )
{
Console.Write("*");
}
Console.WriteLine();
}
This should print a X by X square of asterisks!
I'ma teacher and I left the same task to my students a while ago, I hope you're not one of them! :)