Mono Cecil - Initializing a local variable - c#

I have the following method:
public void DoSomething()
{
Console.WriteLine("");
}
I want to modify this code with Mono Cecil. I want to create an instance of a custom class within the method:
public void DoSomething()
{
MyClass instance = new MyClass();
Console.WriteLine("");
}
Currently I use the following code:
var constructorInfo = typeof(MyClass).GetConstructor(new Type[] { });
MethodReference myClassConstructor = targetAssembly.MainModule.Import(constructorInfo);
var processor = targetMethod.Body.GetILProcessor();
var firstInstruction = targetMethod.Body.Instructions[1];
var instructions = new List<Instruction>() {
processor.Create(OpCodes.Newobj, myClassConstructor),
processor.Create(OpCodes.Stloc_0)
};
foreach (var instruction in instructions)
{
processor.InsertBefore(firstInstruction, instruction);
}
After applying those changes, the program is invalid and cannot be executed.
If i use 'IL DASM' to look at the generated code the following statement is missing:
.locals init ([0] class [MyAssembly]MyNamespace.MyClass instance)
The rest of the IL is the same, as if I directly compile the full code.
Any ideas what I am doing wrong?

I have not tried it but by looking at the Cecil Source Code you should first create the local variable which is part of your MethodBody.
MethodBody has a Variables collection which can be filled via
body.Variables.Add( new VariableDefinition(typedef) )
Then you need to call processor.Create(xxx,indexto local variable);
That should do the trick. The only thing I did not see yet how you can get a TypeDefinition out from a Type. I think you need to load the assembly into Mono Cecil first before you can use this approach.

Related

How to call specific function depending on a variable?

I'm generating a random number from 1-1000. I have 200 functions named function1, function4, function 10, function 11, etc. What I would like to do is execute a specific function depending on if the number generated requires a function, and ignore it if not.
My first thought was to create an int[] containing all of the values that would trigger a function, and if the int[] contains the random number to use if statements to figure out what the number is. I'm concerned that it must be a really crude solution to an easy problem though.
I know the "best way" to do something is subjective, but is there a better way to accomplish this?
UPDATE: As per comments, I should probably have started out by pointing out that doing this for 200 functions is probably a good sign that there is some serious issue in your design. This is probably an XY question where you are trying to solve a problem in some crazy way and asking about your intended solution instead of asking about the problem itself.
That said I'll leave the original answer because it's still good advice when mapping a reasonable amount of function calls that can/will change during the life cylce of your app or dynamically as the code runs.
I won't get into why you are doing this, but I'll try to at least point you in the right direction so this doesn't become a complete nightmare when you need to modify/expand behavior:
You can map numbers to function calls using delegates and a dictionary. Assuming your functions take no arguments and return void you'd do:
var functionsMap = new Dictionary<int, Action>();
//map functions
var r = getSomeRandomNumber();
if (functions.TryGetValue(r), out var a)
a(); //invoke function
Mapping functions is simply adding keys and values:
functionsMap.Add(1, () => function1());
functionsMap.Add(3, () => function3());
//etc.
If your functions take arguments or return values, you'd use the adequate delegate: Action<T>, Func<T1, T2> etc.
You can use reflection to invoke appropriate method:
Type exampleType = exampleObject.GetType();
MethodInfo exampleMethod = exampleType.GetMethod(methodName);
exampleMethod.Invoke(this, null);
Where methodName can be created using your random number.
Without commenting on the wisdom of having 200 functions named the way yours are, you can use reflection to determine whether a given functionX() exists, like so:
public void ExecuteDynamicMethod(int number)
{
// Modify these two lines with your app's dll/exe and class type:
Assembly assembly = Assembly.LoadFile("...Assembly1.dll");
Type type = assembly.GetType("YourClassType");
if (type != null)
{
MethodInfo methodInfo = type.GetMethod("function" + number);
if (methodInfo != null)
{
object classInstance = Activator.CreateInstance(type, null);
methodInfo.Invoke(classInstance, null); // null = "no function arguments"
}
}
}
This can then be called for a given value like
ExecuteDynamicMethod(14);
See this SO answer for the inspiration behind this.
Reflection can be used for this purpose. I want to give and keep below example for not only the objective of the question but also for future reference. Also, of course that many function is not good but below code shows the approach that can work with many functions if they have similar name (like starting with "function" keyword).
Assume below is Methods.cs
using System;
using System.Reflection;
namespace YourMethodNamespace
{
public class YourMethodClass
{
public void function1()
{
Console.WriteLine("Function-1");
}
public void function2()
{
Console.WriteLine("Function-2");
}
...
public void function200()
{
Console.WriteLine("Function-200");
}
public static void invokeMethodsDynamically(int randomNumber){
Type yourClassType = typeof(YourMethodClass);
ConstructorInfo yourClassConstructorInfo = yourClassType.GetConstructor(Type.EmptyTypes);
object yourClassObject = yourClassConstructorInfo.Invoke(new object[]{});
//If the constructor has parameters, then we can pass them by this way. Like below;
/*ConstructorInfo yourClassConstructorInfo = yourClassType.GetConstructor(new[]{typeof(int)});
object yourClassObject = yourClassConstructorInfo.Invoke(new object[]{3});
*/
MethodInfo[] methodInfoArr = yourClassType.GetMethods();
foreach(MethodInfo methodInfo in methodInfoArr){
if(methodInfo.Name == "function" + randomNumber){
methodInfo.Invoke(yourClassObject, null);
}
}
}
}
}
Let's say below is Program.cs
using System;
using YourMethodNamespace;
namespace YourProgramNamespace
{
public class YourProgramClass
{
public static void Main()
{
Random random = new Random();
int randomNumber = random.Next(1, 201);
//If Methods.cs is in another Assembly
/*string pathToDllAssembly = #"Domain.dll";
Assembly dllAssembly = Assembly.LoadFrom(pathToDllAssembly);
Type methodsClassType = dllAssembly.GetType("YourMethodNamespace.YourMethodClass");
ConstructorInfo methodClassConstructorInfo = methodsClassType.GetConstructor(Type.EmptyTypes);
object methodsClassObject = methodClassConstructorInfo.Invoke(new object[]{});
MethodInfo methodInfo = methodsClassType.GetMethod("invokeMethodsDynamically");
methodInfo.Invoke(methodsClassObject, new object[]{randomNumber});
*/
YourMethodClass.invokeMethodsDynamically(randomNumber, null);
}
}
}
Also for testing and observing, below link can be used.
https://repl.it/#erdsavasci/ReflectionTest

MakeGenericMethod/MakeGenericType on Xamarin.iOS

I'm trying to figure out what the limitations really means when deploying for iOS from Xamarin.
http://developer.xamarin.com/guides/ios/advanced_topics/limitations/
I was under the impression that you have no JIT and thus any MakeGenericMethod or MakeGenericType would NOT work as that would require JIT compilation.
Also I understood that when running on the simulator, these restrictions does not apply since the simulator is not running in the full AOT (Ahead of Time) mode.
After setting up my Mac so that I could deploy to my phone, I would except the following test to fail when running on the actual device (iPhone).
[Test]
public void InvokeGenericMethod()
{
var method = typeof(SampleTests).GetMethod ("SomeGenericMethod");
var closedMethod = method.MakeGenericMethod (GetTypeArgument());
closedMethod.Invoke (null, new object[]{42});
}
public static void SomeGenericMethod<T>(T value)
{
}
private Type GetTypeArgument()
{
return typeof(int);
}
The thing is that completes successfully and I can't really understand why. Does not this code require JIT compilation?
In an effort to "make it break" , I also did a test with MakeGenericType.
[Test]
public void InvokeGenericType()
{
var type = typeof(SomeGenericClass<>).MakeGenericType (typeof(string));
var instance = Activator.CreateInstance (type);
var method = type.GetMethod ("Execute");
method.Invoke (instance, new object[]{"Test"});
}
public class SomeGenericClass<T>
{
public void Execute(T value)
{
}
}
How can this work when there is no JIT?
Am I missing something ?
In order to make the code fail go to iOS project options, tab "iOS Build" and change the "Linker Behavior:" to "Link all assemblies". Running the code will result in Exception and it will be of type default constructor for type XXX was not found.
Now, make a reference to the SomeGenericClass{string} in your code and the method will run just fine. The two added lines cause the compiler to include SomeGenericClass{string} in the binary. Note that the lines can be anywhere in the application that is compiled into the binary, they don't have to be in the same function.
public void InvokeGenericType()
{
// comment out the two lines below to make the code fail
var strClass = new SomeGenericClass<string>();
strClass.Execute("Test");
var type = typeof(SomeGenericClass<>).MakeGenericType (typeof(string));
var instance = Activator.CreateInstance (type);
var method = type.GetMethod ("Execute");
method.Invoke (instance, new object[]{"Test"});
}

What does the trailing dot on a C# type indicate?

I've been looking at some code in a debugger associated with Razor View engine and I noticed that some of the types appear in Debugger with a trailing dot character at the end of the type name e.g.:
{Nancy.ViewEngines.Razor.RazorViewEngine.}
Does anyone know what this indicates? It's not valid syntax to use it when specifying a cast on an object so I'm intrigued as to what it indicates within the debugger.
EDIT: As requested by #Damien_The_Unbeliever, screenshot of the variable in debugger:
And the code that I'm looking at:
public TCompiledView GetOrAdd<TCompiledView>(
ViewLocationResult viewLocationResult, Func<ViewLocationResult, TCompiledView> valueFactory)
{
TCompiledView compiledView = default(TCompiledView);
compiledView = (TCompiledView)this.cache.GetOrAdd(viewLocationResult, x => valueFactory(x));
To give a little more background, we're trying to add logging to our Nancy View Cache to investigate an intermittent issue with Razor Views throwing compilation errors, but that isn't really relevant to the question.
I've seen this happen when the variable/value is actually of a compiler generated type (e.g. for holding the "local variables" captured by a lambda, async, iterator, etc). The debugger (in various places) seems unable to display the actual class name.
E.g. this example program:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var p = new Program();
p.DoStuff();
}
void DoStuff()
{
int i = 19;
Expression<Func<int>> j = () => i + 10;
var k = (((j.Body as BinaryExpression).Left as MemberExpression).Expression as ConstantExpression).Value;
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
With a breakpoint on Console.ReadLine(), you'll find the k class's type looks like Program. rather than Program+<>_DisplayClass0
Addition by Jeppe: This example is a slight simplification of the above, avoiding the expression tree. Looks at a delegate instance's Target which will be an instance of a generated class. For comparison also looks at an iterator block type:
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
static class Program
{
static void Main()
{
int i = 19; // to be captured by lambda, will become field on a generated class
Func<int> f = () => i;
var target = f.Target; // when debugging type looks like "Program."
Console.WriteLine(target.GetType().ToString()); // writes "Program+<>c__DisplayClass1"
var seq = GetSeq(); // when debugging type looks like "Program.GetSeq"
Console.WriteLine(seq.GetType().ToString()); // writes "Program+<GetSeq>d__3"
}
static IEnumerable<int> GetSeq() // returns "state machine" (iterator block)
{
yield return 42;
}
}

How can I instantiate a COM class interface generically

I'm trying to refactor a piece of code and ran out of options I can think off.
This is the original code I had:
if (WebConfigSettings.ComPartition == null && HttpContext.Current != null)
Nses = new NSession();
else
Nses = (INSession)Marshal.BindToMoniker(string.Format("partition:{0}/new:NuntioServer.NSession", WebConfigSettings.ComPartition));
AND
if (WebConfigSettings.ComPartition == null && HttpContext.Current != null)
apses.Wses = new WSession();
else
apses.Wses = (IWSession)Marshal.BindToMoniker(string.Format("partition:{0}/new:NuntioServer.WSession", WebConfigSettings.ComPartition));
And this is how I'm trying to refactor it:
(Yes, in C# you can instantiate an interface.)
public static TInterface Get<TSubInterface, TInterface>() where TSubInterface: TInterface
{
<snip></snip>
if (!useComPartitions)
return Activator.CreateInstance<TSubInterface>(); // --> this is not cooperating
return (TInterface)Marshal.BindToMoniker(.....);
}
Here's what I already tried:
I tried specifying the new() constraint and then doing a 'new TSubInterface()':
this results in a build error: "..must be a non-abstract type with a public parameterless constructor in order to use it as parameter 'TSubInterface' in the generic type or method.."
when I use Activator.CreateInstance, I get a runtime exception: "Cannot create an instance of an interface"
when I use Activator.CreateComInstanceFrom("someAssemblyName", "typeName"), I get a compilation error: "Cannot convert expression type 'System.Runtime.Remoting.ObjectHandle' to return type TInterface"
[edit] I was able to make this compile by adding 'where TSubInterface : class, but I'm not sure if that makes sense, since TSubInterface is an interface.
Using CreateComInstanceFrom also doesn't work, because it's trying to find the assembly which is specified in a directory where that dll is not and should not be.
Can I somehow make this compile and run?
You'll need to focus on the seeming magic of being able to create a class object from an interface name. Let's pick an example that everybody can try. Create a new console application and use Project + Add Reference, Browse tab and select c:\windows\system32\shell32.dll.
Have a look at the interop library that generates with Object Browser. Note how the Shell type is an interface type. Now write this code:
class Program {
static void Main(string[] args) {
var shl = new Shell32.Shell();
}
}
Compile and run ildasm.exe on the .exe file. You'll see:
.method private hidebysig static void Main(string[] args) cil managed
{
.entrypoint
// Code size 8 (0x8)
.maxstack 1
.locals init ([0] class [Interop.Shell32]Shell32.Shell 'shl')
IL_0000: nop
IL_0001: newobj instance void [Interop.Shell32]Shell32.ShellClass::.ctor()
IL_0006: stloc.0
IL_0007: ret
} // end of method Program::Main
Note how the type name got substituted from Shell to ShellClass. The type library importer created that class, it uses the original coclass name and append "Class" to the name. The compiler makes that substitution.
Which is the key, Activator.CreateInstance() is not able to make that same substitution. I don't see an obvious way to have generics make that same substitution, beyond directly using the IFooClass name instead of the interface name. Technically you can retrieve the [CoClass] attribute that the type library importer applied to the interface type.
It can be done by figuring out what's the coClass of that interface and creating an instance of that:
var coClassAttribute = type.GetCustomAttribute<CoClassAttribute>(); // our extension method
return (TSubInterface)Activator.CreateInstance(coClassAttribute.CoClass);
I am not satisfied with this, but it works.
(won't mark this as the correct answer)

How best to create and execute a method in a .NET (C#) class dynamically through configuration

I'm thinking of something along the lines of the "Inline Task" in MsBuild. For reference: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd722601.aspx
I'd like to find or create a framework which allows me to override a method via configuration. For example if I have a well known base class which has a method Execute(args), how can I supply an overridden method implementation at deployment time, without requiring new code, build, release cycle? I would like to actually plug in the method body into a config file or preferably a database table.
I assume this would be done either with code dom, dynamic language integration, or perhaps something like powershell(?). I'm looking for recommendations or perhaps a library someone has already written.
The application is written in C#. Preferably the extension would also be in C#, but I'm open to other ideas as well.
Update: Technically I don't even have to actually override a method. It would be sufficient to just be able to dynamically execute some external source code, passing in an arg and returning a result.
Update. I ended up writing code to instantiate a PowerShell object and execute a script dynamically to return a value. Here is a snippet of code I used.
public static Collection<PSObject> ExecuteScript(string code, string variableName, object variableValue)
{
PowerShell ps = PowerShell.Create();
ps.AddScript(code);
if (!string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(variableName))
{
ps.Runspace.SessionStateProxy.SetVariable(variableName, variableValue);
}
var result = ps.Invoke();
return result;
}
Then in the calling code, I simply check the first PSObject in the return value, and pull the resulting value from it. It works great. Thanks for all the responses.
Here are two examples of dynamic execution. I have used neither though so I can't comment further.
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/evaluator.aspx
http://www.csharpfriends.com/articles/getarticle.aspx?articleid=118
Regarding namespaces, from the second article you can add assemblies through the CompilerParameter class.
// Create the C# compiler
CSharpCodeProvider csCompiler = new CSharpCodeProvider();
ICodeCompiler iCodeCompiler = csCompiler.CreateCompiler();
// input params for the compiler
CompilerParameters compilerParams = new CompilerParameters();
compilerParams.OutputAssembly = "CSharpFriends.dll";
compilerParams.ReferencedAssemblies.Add("system.dll");
One option would be to use Iron Python (or another DLR language). Your Execute method would then lookup the script in your configuration file, compile it and execute it all at runtime.
Including the necessary Iron Python assemblies with your project isn't a significant overhead.
You might need to do some plumbing to expose other parts of your application to the python runtime environment but this is quite easy to do.
You can use interfaces and then resolve the concrete classes at runtime e.g. using configuration files.
Check the various Dependency Injection Containers at http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ListOfNETDependencyInjectionContainersIOC.aspx
Managed Extensibility Framework (MEF) might be suitable as well. It was included as part of .NET 4.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd460648.aspx
http://mef.codeplex.com/
If the extensibility is just for one method then MEF would be overkill. If what you are extending will grow over time then I think MEF would provide the most robust and long-term manageable framework.
It looks like you might want to have a look at the Factory Pattern; returning delegates. Unfortunately you will need a type to 'house' the method, so you would typically generate code like:
namespace Dynamic {
public static int Foo(int bar) {
// .. Configured body here.
}
}
It's important that your factory does not generate methods it has seen before. Here is an example:
static class Delegates
{
private static Func<Func<int, string>> _test;
public static Func<int, string> Test
{
get
{
return _test();
}
}
static Delegates()
{
// Use your config variables instead of the "return arg.ToString();"
CreateFactory<Func<int, string>>(x => _test = x, "return arg.ToString();");
}
private static void CreateFactory<TDelegate>(Action<Func<TDelegate>> locationSetter, string identifier)
{
locationSetter(() =>
{
var result = Generate<TDelegate>(identifier);
locationSetter(() => result);
return result;
});
}
private static string GenerateSignature<TDelegate>()
{
// Create the signature of the delegate.
var t = typeof(TDelegate);
if (!typeof(Delegate).IsAssignableFrom(t))
throw new Exception("TDelegate must be delegate type.");
var invoke = t.GetMethod("Invoke");
var sig = new StringBuilder();
// Append the return type.
if (invoke.ReturnType == typeof(void))
sig.Append("void");
else
sig.Append(invoke.ReturnType.FullName);
sig.Append(" ");
sig.Append("Invoke(");
// Append the parameters.
var param = invoke.GetParameters();
for (var i = 0; i < param.Length; i++)
{
if (i != 0)
sig.Append(", ");
sig.Append(param[i].ParameterType.FullName);
sig.Append(" ");
sig.Append(param[i].Name);
}
sig.Append(")");
return sig.ToString();
}
private static TDelegate Generate<TDelegate>(string code)
{
// Generate the containing class and method.
var codeBuilder = new StringBuilder(50);
codeBuilder.AppendLine("using System;");
codeBuilder.Append("namespace Dynamic { class DynamicClass { public static ");
codeBuilder.Append(GenerateSignature<TDelegate>());
codeBuilder.AppendLine("{");
codeBuilder.AppendLine(code);
codeBuilder.AppendLine("} } }");
var compilerVersion = new Version(1, 0, 0, 0);
// Create the compiler parameters.
var parameters = new CompilerParameters();
parameters.GenerateInMemory = true;
parameters.GenerateExecutable = false;
parameters.ReferencedAssemblies.Clear();
foreach (var referenceAssembly in AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies())
{
parameters.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(referenceAssembly.Location);
// Figure out which version we are compiling against.
var an = new AssemblyName(referenceAssembly.FullName);
if (an.Name == "mscorlib" && compilerVersion < an.Version)
{
compilerVersion = an.Version;
}
}
var cp = new CSharpCodeProvider(
new Dictionary<string, string>() { { "CompilerVersion", string.Format("v{0}.{1}", compilerVersion.Major, compilerVersion.Minor) } }
);
var results = cp.CompileAssemblyFromSource(parameters, codeBuilder.ToString());
if (results.Errors.HasErrors)
throw new Exception("Method failed to compile.");
var assembly = results.CompiledAssembly;
if (assembly == null)
throw new Exception("Method failed to compile.");
var t = assembly.GetType("Dynamic.DynamicClass");
if (t == null)
throw new Exception("Method failed to compile.");
var m = t.GetMethod("Invoke");
if (m == null)
throw new Exception("Method failed to compile.");
return (TDelegate)(object)Delegate.CreateDelegate(typeof(TDelegate), m);
}
}

Categories