CA2000 Microsoft Reliability - code-analysis

Warning CA2000 : Microsoft.Reliability : In method 'ProtocolHelper<TClass, TClassType>.ProcessApplicanceData(object)', call System.IDisposable.Dispose on object '<>g__initLocal5' before all references to it are out of scope.
Below is the code and above is the warning I got.
public WCFServiceClient(Callback callback, WDaaSAuthMode authMode)
: base()
{
AuthMode = authMode;
CallbackInstance = callback;
}
public T Client
{
get
{
if (_client == null)
{
channelFactory = new DuplexChannelFactory<T>(CallbackInstance, EndPoint);
return CreateClient();
}
return _client;
}
}
public Callback CallbackInstance { get; set; }
}
I got this above warning in many cases like that. I tried "using" and "try, finally" but nothing solved my problem. Could anyone help me in resolving this. Thanks in advance.

Have you made sure that generated code is not analyzed? that variable name sounds like a compiler generated one.

Related

Naming convention when the method signature is the same?

Hi when you have a method with same signature let's say.
void getErrorMessage(int errorCode){
}
void getErrorMessage(int domain){
}
I know I have to change the name or differentiate the parameter but what would be the best way to approach?
---------------------------Edited.
How about for constructor?
For example
public ErrorMessage(int errorCode){
}
public ErrorMessage(int domain){
}
You could make the method name explicit:
getErrorByErrorCode(int errorCode)
And
getErrorByDomain(int domain)
You can add a "ByFoo" to the end of the method, like: getErrorMessageByCode or getErrorMessageByDomain
The least dangerous and easiest-to-understand way to do this is:
public class ErrorCode {
private int intCode;
ErrorCode(int intCode) {
this.intCode = intCode;
}
int getIntegerCode() {
return intCode;
}
}
public class Domain {
private int domain;
Domain(int domain) {
this.domain = domain;
}
int getIntegerCode() {
return domain;
}
}
Message getErrorMessage(ErrorCode errorCode)
Message getErrorMessage(Domain domain)
Note the classes are immutable. You should probably also override equals. Use these classes everywhere you would have used the integer values.
Now it is impossible to mistake an error code for a domain anywhere in your code. If you mistake one for the other you will get a compiler error, and the compiler will choose the correct implementation of getErrorMessage. You extract the integer value from the object only when you need to perform integer operations on it.

How to properly handle WCF faults with Silverlight?

No matter how hard I try I cannot seem to be able to handle WCF faults in Silverlight.
In fact the error seems to never leave the server !
E.g. when I debug it, it stops on the line where I throw the FaultException saying it was not handled:
[SilverlightFaultBehavior]
[AspNetCompatibilityRequirements(RequirementsMode = AspNetCompatibilityRequirementsMode.Allowed)]
public class StoreService : IStoreContract
{
public System.Collections.Generic.List<string> GetStoreDesignNames()
{
try
{
StoreDataContext swdc = new StoreDataContext();
var query = from storeDesign in swdc.StoreDesignDBs select storeDesign.Name;
return query.ToList();
}
catch (System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException sqlExcept)
{
throw new FaultException<SqlFault>(new SqlFault() { Message = sqlExcept.Message });
}
}
}
The class that implements this method derives from a contract interface:
[ServiceContract(Namespace = "Store")]
public interface IStoreContract
{
/// <summary>
/// Obtain the list of store design names.
/// </summary>
[OperationContract,
FaultContract(typeof(SqlFault))]
List<String> GetStoreDesignNames();
}
And the SqlFault class is defined like this:
public class SqlFault
{
public String Message { get; set; }
}
On the client side I handle the error as follow:
// swc is the client
swc.GetStoreDesignNamesCompleted += new EventHandler<ServiceReference.GetStoreDesignNamesCompletedEventArgs>((obj, evt) =>
{
if (evt.Error == null)
{
// In case of success
MessageBox.Show(evt.Result.First());
}
else if (evt.Error is FaultException<ServiceReference.SqlFault>)
{
FaultException<ServiceReference.SqlFault> fault = evt.Error as FaultException<ServiceReference.SqlFault>;
Dispatcher.BeginInvoke(() =>
{
ErrorWindow ew = new ErrorWindow(fault.Detail.Message, "No details");
ew.Show();
});
}
});
swc.GetStoreDesignNamesAsync();
I have tried to put the [SilverlightFaultBehavior] attribute on the interface, to no avail. Even if I do without the interface I still have this error.
I have also tried to use a behavior extension in the web.config as described here but I get a warning saying the extension is not valid.
How does one go about properly handling WCF fault in Siverlight ?
Thanks in advance.
I haven't used WCF (been using WCF RIA Services) but I did come across this article a while ago.
Getting something better than “Server not found.” from WCF in Silverlight
After battling with this for hours I finally hacked something together that works.
This is really a horrible hack and I would have much preferred to use BehaviorExtension for this task. The trick is to set manually the HTTP status code in the body of the WCF method like so:
public System.Collections.Generic.List<string> GetStoreDesignNames()
{
try
{
StoreDataContext swdc = new StoreDataContext();
var query = from storeDesign in swdc.StoreDesignDBs select storeDesign.Name;
return query.ToList();
}
catch (System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException sqlExcept)
{
System.ServiceModel.Web.WebOperationContext ctx = System.ServiceModel.Web.WebOperationContext.Current;
ctx.OutgoingResponse.StatusCode = System.Net.HttpStatusCode.OK;
throw new FaultException<SqlFault>(new SqlFault() { Message = sqlExcept.Message });
}
}
The error message then correctly displays on the client side.
If anybody has a better solution than this I'd like to hear it.

Jackson vector serialization exception

I have the following code with a simple class and a method for writing and then reading:
ObjectMapper mapper = new ObjectMapper();
try{
DataStore testOut = new DataStore();
DataStore.Checklist ch1 = testOut.addChecklist();
ch1.SetTitle("Checklist1");
String output = mapper.writeValueAsString(testOut);
JsonNode rootNode = mapper.readValue(output, JsonNode.class);
Map<String,Object> userData = mapper.readValue(output, Map.class);
}
public class DataStore {
public static class Checklist
{
public Checklist()
{
}
private String _title;
public String GetTitle()
{
return _title;
}
public void SetTitle(String title)
{
_title = title;
}
}
//Checklists
private Vector<Checklist> _checklists = new Vector<Checklist>();
public Checklist addChecklist()
{
Checklist ch = new Checklist();
ch.SetTitle("New Checklist");
_checklists.add(ch);
return ch;
}
public Vector<Checklist> getChecklists()
{
return _checklists;
}
public void setChecklists(Vector<Checklist> checklists)
{
_checklists = checklists;
}
}
The line:
String output = mapper.writeValueAsString(testOut);
causes an exception that has had me baffled for hours and about to abandon using this at all.
Any hints are appreciated.
Here is the exception:
No serializer found for class DataStore$Checklist and no properties discovered to create BeanSerializer (to avoid exception, disable SerializationConfig.Feature.FAIL_ON_EMPTY_BEANS) ) (through reference chain: DataStore["checklists"]->java.util.Vector[0])
There are multiple ways to do it, but I will start with what you are doing wrong: your naming of getter and setter method is wrong -- in Java one uses "camel-case", so you should be using "getTitle". Because of this, properties are not found.
Besides renaming methods to use Java-style names, there are alternatives:
You can use annotation JsonProperty("title") for GetTitle(), so that property is recognized
If you don't want the wrapper object, you could alternatively just add #JsonValue for GetTitle(), in which case value used for the whole object would be return value of that method.
The answer seems to be: You can't do that with Json. I've seen comments in the Gson tutorial as well, that state that some serialization just doesn't work. I downloaded XStream and spat it out with XML in a few minutes of work and a lot less construction around what I really wanted to persist. In the process, I was able to delete a lot of code.

MVVM-Light and WP7 ViewModel tombstoning isn't working

I've tried following the steps in Joost Van Schaik's article on tombstoning but was unable to get it to work for me. I'm no doubt doing something wrong. In my ViewModel:
private string _foobar ="init";
public string testStr
{
get
{
return _foobar;
}
set
{
_foobar = value;
}
}
And in my page:
<TextBox x:Name="tBoxTest" Text="{Binding testStr, Mode=TwoWay}" />
While the application is running, changing the value in tBoxTest sets _foobar just fine, but try to serialize it and it’s as if it has forgotten the instance??? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
I was able to get tombstoning to work, along with having an object be visible to all my ViewModels, by doing the following:
In a Model class, I added:
private static Model1 _instance;
public static Model1 Instance
{
get { return _instance; }
set { _instance = value; }
}
public static void CreateNew()
{
if (_instance == null)
{
_instance = new Model1();
_instance.FirstString = "init";
}
}
Then in ApplicationExtensions.cs I added:
public static void SaveToIsolatedStorage(this Application app, Model1 model)
{
var dataFileName = GetIsFile((model.GetType()));
using (var userAppStore =
IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication())
{
if (userAppStore.FileExists(dataFileName))
{
userAppStore.DeleteFile(dataFileName);
}
using (var iss = userAppStore.CreateFile(dataFileName))
{
SilverlightSerializer.Serialize(model, iss);
}
}
}
And in App.xaml.cs I changed LoadModel() to:
private void LoadModel()
{
try
{
Model1.Instance = this.RetrieveFromIsolatedStorage<Model1>();
}
catch (Exception) { }
if (Model1.Instance == null) Model1.CreateNew();
}
That all made things like this work in my ViewModel files:
public string TestStr
{
get
{
return Model1.Instance.FirstString;
}
set
{
Model1.Instance.FirstString = value;
}
}
And by that, I mean that the Model1 object is getting serialized and tombstoning is working - at least I’m getting what I think I want. I’ve tested it a lot by navigating between apps, phone settings, turning the phone off and on, locking it and calling it while in the app from another phone. Performance when deserializing is great. And I can work with the vars.
That said, Mr. Van Schaik replied to a request for assistance with: "If you are subclassing from an MVVMLight ViewModelBase it does, and then you should call RaisePropertyChanged from your setter like this:
private string _foobar ="init";
public string TestStr
{
get
{
return _foobar;
}
set
{
RaisePropertyChanged("TestStr");
_foobar = value;
}
}
RaisePropertyChanged notifies any listenings views (i.e. the TextBox you bound to it) that a property is changed and that the should update their contents. This is a crucial mechanism."
So I will work with what I was originally trying but with the addition of RaisePropertyChanged to see what that does.
UPDATE
Although I implemented RaisedPropertyChanged (using the code snippet mvvminpc) in my MainViewModel.cs file, that still had no effect (as good as it may be for other things) on serializing anything created within the ViewModel. I'm probably still doing something wrong, but it may also be because view models inherit from a protected class (answer from Laurent Bugnion). I (very reluctantly) tried changing that class from protected to public and recompiling, but it didn't help in my case and I hate to fork a referenced library like that. Anyway, I'm just forging ahead for now with creating the Model1 instance in App.xaml.cs. Seems to work. While I was at it, I modified one of Van Schaik's methods to accept any type of object:
public static void SaveToIsolatedStorage<T>(this Application app, T obj)
where T : class
{
var dataFileName = GetIsFile(typeof(T));
using (var userAppStore =
IsolatedStorageFile.GetUserStoreForApplication())
{
if (userAppStore.FileExists(dataFileName))
{
userAppStore.DeleteFile(dataFileName);
}
using (var iss = userAppStore.CreateFile(dataFileName))
{
SilverlightSerializer.Serialize(obj, iss);
}
}
}
From the code you've posted there isn't an instant answer.
My advice to debug this is:
if you've copied the code exactly from that article then add something (a messagebox?) to the empty catch handler - `catch (Exception){ }
use the debugger to put breakpoints in the LoadModel and SaveToIsolatedStorage methods
use these breakpoints to step through the Load and Save code - is the code correctly loading and saving?
To be honest, with problems like this, doing a little investigation yourself is much better than asking questions on here (IMO!)

Rhino.Mocks how to test abstract class method calls

I'm trying to test if the method I want to test calls some external (mock) object properly.
Here is the sample code:
using System;
using Rhino.Mocks;
using NUnit.Framework;
namespace RhinoTests
{
public abstract class BaseWorker
{
public abstract int DoWork(string data);
}
public class MyClass
{
private BaseWorker worker;
public BaseWorker Worker
{
get { return this.worker; }
}
public MyClass(BaseWorker worker)
{
this.worker = worker;
}
public int MethodToTest(string data)
{
return this.Worker.DoWork(data);
}
}
[TestFixture]
public class RhinoTest
{
[Test]
public void TestMyMethod()
{
BaseWorker mock = MockRepository.GenerateMock<BaseWorker>();
MyClass myClass = new MyClass(mock);
string testData = "SomeData";
int expResponse = 10;
//I want to verify, that the method forwards the input to the worker
//and returns the result of the call
Expect.Call(mock.DoWork(testData)).Return(expResponse);
mock.GetMockRepository().ReplayAll();
int realResp = myClass.MethodToTest(testData);
Assert.AreEqual(expResponse, realResp);
}
}
}
When I run this test, I get:
TestCase 'RhinoTests.RhinoTest.TestMyMethod'
failed: System.InvalidOperationException : Invalid call, the last call has been used or no call has been made (make sure that you are calling a virtual (C#) / Overridable (VB) method).
at Rhino.Mocks.LastCall.GetOptions[T]()
at Rhino.Mocks.Expect.Call[T](T ignored)
RhinoTest.cs(48,0): at RhinoTests.RhinoTest.TestMyMethod()
The exception is thrown on the Expect.Call line, before any invocation is made.
How do I approach this - i.e. how to check if the method under test properly forwards the call?
This is .Net 2.0 project (I can no change this for now), so no "x =>" syntax :(
I have to admit, I'm not entirely sure what's going on here, but using Rhino.Mocks 3.6 and the newer syntax, it works fine for me:
[Test]
public void TestMyMethod()
{
MockRepository mocks = new MockRepository();
BaseWorker mock = mocks.StrictMock<BaseWorker>();
MyClass myClass = new MyClass(mock);
string testData = "SomeData";
int expResponse = 10;
using (mocks.Record())
{
//I want to verify, that the method forwards the input to the worker
//and returns the result of the call
Expect.Call(mock.DoWork(testData)).Return(expResponse);
}
using (mocks.Playback())
{
int realResp = myClass.MethodToTest(testData);
Assert.AreEqual(expResponse, realResp);
}
}
It doesn't have anything to do with the Rhino.Mocks version. With the old syntax, I get the same error as you're getting. I didn't spot any obvious errors in your code, but then again, I'm used to this using syntax.
Edit: removed the var keyword, since you're using .NET 2.0.