How do I copy from a const generic object? - c++-cli

I'm working on a generic circular buffer but have hit a stumbling block when it comes to the copy constructor (see the code example below).
using namespace System;
/// A generic circular buffer with a fixed-size internal buffer which allows the caller to push data onto the buffer, pop data back off again and provides direct indexed access to any element.
generic<typename T>
public ref class CircularBuffer
{
protected:
array<T, 1>^ m_buffer; /// The internal buffer used to store the data.
unsigned int m_resultsInBuffer; /// A counter which records the number of results currently held in the buffer
T m_nullValue; /// The value used to represent a null value within the buffer
public:
CircularBuffer(unsigned int size, T nullValue):
m_buffer(gcnew array<T, 1>(size)),
m_nullValue(nullValue),
m_resultsInBuffer(0)
{
}
/// <summary>
/// Copy constructor
/// </summary>
CircularBuffer(const CircularBuffer^& rhs)
{
CopyObject(rhs);
}
/// <summary>
/// Assignment operator.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="objectToCopy"> The Zph2CsvConverter object to assign from. </param>
/// <returns> This Zph2CsvConverter object following the assignment. </returns>
CircularBuffer% operator=(const CircularBuffer^& objectToCopy)
{
CopyObject(objectToCopy);
return *this;
}
protected:
/// <summary>
/// Copies the member variables from a Zph2CsvConverter object to this object.
/// </summary>
/// <param name="objectToBeCopied"> The Zph2CsvConverter to be copied. </param>
void CopyObject(const CircularBuffer^& objectToBeCopied)
{
m_buffer = safe_cast<array<T, 1>^>(objectToBeCopied->m_buffer->Clone());
m_nullValue = objectToBeCopied->m_nullValue; // <-- "error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'const T' to 'T'"
m_resultsInBuffer = objectToBeCopied->m_resultsInBuffer;
}
};
Compiling this gives me error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'const T' to 'T'
Typically I'd be using this with my own ref classes which include pointers to managed and unmanaged memory so the contents of the buffer would need to be deep copied if the entire buffer is duplicated.
What am I missing here? Why can't I copy from something of type const T to something of type T?

Another entry in the continuing saga of "C++/CLI doesn't really support const".
The copy constructor in C++/CLI is T(T%). The assignment operator is T% operator=(T%). No const and no ref.
A good place to see them used is vc/include/cliext, home of the STL/CLR implementation classes. Don't use them.

Related

SignalR not invoking server-side method if it has an overload which expects an instance of a class

I have this method at my Hub:
Public Sub SaveFields(ByVal changeSignal As String)
Dim foo As Integer = 5
End Sub
If I call it from client-side like this:
testHub.server.saveFields("abc");
then SaveFields is called successfully. However, if I have a Class like this:
Public Class WOChangeSignal
Public WOID As Integer
Public FieldUpdates As Dictionary(Of String, String)
End Class
and add an overload for SaveFields like this:
Public Sub SaveFields(ByVal changeSignal As WOChangeSignal)
Dim foo As Integer = 5
End Sub
Public Sub SaveFields(ByVal changeSignal As String)
Dim foo As Integer = 5
End Sub
then my call of
testHub.server.saveFields("abc");
will be unsuccssful, just like my call of
testHub.server.saveFields({
WOID: 1234,
FieldUpdates: [
{Key: 2, Value: 4},
{Key: 3, Value: 5}
]
});
as none of these tries are actually invoking the server-side method. As a consequence, I assume that the problem is the overload which expects an instance of a Class. So, my question is as follows: why is SignalR not invoking none of the overloads if I add an overload expecting WOChangeSignal parameter?
It turns out that this is the cause:
/// <summary>
/// Searches the specified <paramref name="hub">Hub</paramref> for the specified <paramref name="method"/>.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// In the case that there are multiple overloads of the specified <paramref name="method"/>, the <paramref name="parameters">parameter set</paramref> helps determine exactly which instance of the overload should be resolved.
/// If there are multiple overloads found with the same number of matching parameters, none of the methods will be returned because it is not possible to determine which overload of the method was intended to be resolved.
/// </remarks>
/// <param name="hub">Hub to search for the specified <paramref name="method"/> on.</param>
/// <param name="method">The method name to search for.</param>
/// <param name="descriptor">If successful, the <see cref="MethodDescriptor"/> that was resolved.</param>
/// <param name="parameters">The set of parameters that will be used to help locate a specific overload of the specified <paramref name="method"/>.</param>
/// <returns>True if the method matching the name/parameter set is found on the hub, otherwise false.</returns>
public bool TryGetMethod(HubDescriptor hub, string method, out MethodDescriptor descriptor, IList<IJsonValue> parameters)
{
string hubMethodKey = BuildHubExecutableMethodCacheKey(hub, method, parameters);
if (!_executableMethods.TryGetValue(hubMethodKey, out descriptor))
{
IEnumerable<MethodDescriptor> overloads;
if (FetchMethodsFor(hub).TryGetValue(method, out overloads))
{
var matches = overloads.Where(o => o.Matches(parameters)).ToList();
// If only one match is found, that is the "executable" version, otherwise none of the methods can be returned because we don't know which one was actually being targeted
descriptor = matches.Count == 1 ? matches[0] : null;
}
else
{
descriptor = null;
}
// If an executable method was found, cache it for future lookups (NOTE: we don't cache null instances because it could be a surface area for DoS attack by supplying random method names to flood the cache)
if (descriptor != null)
{
_executableMethods.TryAdd(hubMethodKey, descriptor);
}
}
return descriptor != null;
}
As we can see, if there is not exactly a single match, then descriptor will be null. It turns out that this is by design and the reason given is as follows:
If only one match is found, that is the "executable" version,
otherwise none of the methods can be returned because we don't know
which one was actually being targeted

Error: member names cannot be the same at their enclosing type

I was using ASP.NET4.5 and visual studio 2013 to create a sample application Wingtip Toys. But when trying to display data item and details It showing error in the last line of code bellow which is-
protected global::System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListView ProductList;
ProductList: member names cannot be the same at their enclosing type.
namespace WingtipToys
{
public partial class ProductList
{
/// <summary>
/// ProductList control.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Auto-generated field.
/// To modify move field declaration from designer file to code-behind file.
/// </remarks>
protected global::System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListView ProductList;
}
}
The class ProductList cannot contain a field, property, or method named ProductList as well. Try using the following code instead:
public partial class ProductList
{
/// <summary>
/// ProductList control.
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>
/// Auto-generated field.
/// To modify move field declaration from designer file to code-behind file.
/// </remarks>
protected global::System.Web.UI.WebControls.ListView Products;
}
Likewise, a namespace cannot contain a class with the same name as the namespace.

Moq - Is it possible to specify in a Setup the Verify criteria (e.g. Times called)?

If you need to Setup a return value, as well as Verify how many times the expression was called, can you do this in one statement?
From what I can gather, Moq's Setup(SomeExpression).Verifiable() called along with Verify(), basically does a Verify(SomeExpression, Times.AtLeastOnce)? i.e. it verifys the expression was called only.
Here's an example to explain the question better. For an interface:
interface IFoo
{
int ReturnSomething();
}
Are the following two blocks equivalent (other than the first will Verify all setups marked as verifiable)?
void Test()
{
var mock = new Mock<IFoo>();
mock.Setup((m) => m.ReturnSomething()).Returns(1).Verifiable();
mock.Verify();
}
and
void Test()
{
var mock = new Mock<IFoo>();
mock.Setup((m) => m.ReturnSomething()).Returns(1);
mock.Verify((m) => m.ReturnSomething(), Times.AtLeastOnce());
}
If I wanted to verify the number of calls (say twice), is this the only way, where the expression is repeated for the Setup and Verify?
void Test()
{
var mock = new Mock<IFoo>();
mock.Setup((m) => m.ReturnSomething()).Returns(1);
mock.Verify((m) => m.ReturnSomething(), Times.Exactly(2));
}
I just don't like having to call Setup and Verify. Well, since this is a good idea for AAA, to rephrase, I don't like having to repeat the expression for the Setup and Verify. At the moment I store the expression in a variable and pass it to each method, but doesn't feel so clean.
PS - The context for this is for a test checking when a cache is updated or not (expirations etc.)
I have this problem all the time. I use strict mocks, and I want to specify strictly (i.e. I used It.Is<>() instead of It.IsAny()) as well as verify strictly (i.e. specifying Times). You cannot use verifiable for this sadly, because Moq is missing a Verifiable(Times) overload.
The full expression of the call, including It.Is<>() is generally big. So in order to avoid duplication I generally resort to the following:
Expression<Action<MockedType>> expression = mockedTypeInstance => mockedTypeInstance.MockedMethod(It.Is<TFirstArgument>(firstArgument => <some complex statement>)/*, ...*/);
_mock.Setup(expression);
/* run the test*/
_mock.Verify(expression, Times.Once);
Not extremely readable, but I don't think there is another way to both use strict setup and strict verification.
To answer the first question, yes the two blocks are equivalent. Both will fail when .Verify is called if the method on the mock wasn't called.
You can't specify the verify up front as far as I am aware and if you think about it, it makes sense.
This is specifying the behavior of the mock:
mock.Setup(m => m.ReturnSomething()).Returns(1);
This is verifying the behavior of the caller:
mock.Verify(m => m.ReturnSomething(), Times.AtLeastOnce());
Personally I prefer calling verify individually to confirm the required behavior of the caller, the .Verifiable() and .Verify() are shortcuts that are less strict (they just check the method was called one or more times) however if you know your code should only call a method once, put the verify in at the end to confirm it.
I started doing that after a code merge resulted in a method being called twice, the test still passed since it was called at least once but it also meant that something else happened multiple times which shouldn't have!
Expounding on the answer by Evren Kuzucuoglu, I created the following extension methods to make creating the expressions a little simpler:
/// <summary>
/// Creates a method call expression that can be passed to both <see cref="Setup"/> and <see cref="Verify"/>.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">Mocked object type.</typeparam>
/// <param name="mock">Mock of <see cref="T"/>.</param>
/// <param name="expression">Method call expression to record.</param>
/// <returns>Method call expression.</returns>
public static Expression<Action<T>> CallTo<T>(this Mock<T> mock, Expression<Action<T>> expression) where T : class
{
return expression;
}
/// <summary>
/// Creates a method call expression that can be passed to both <see cref="Setup"/> and <see cref="Verify"/>.
/// </summary>
/// <typeparam name="T">Mocked object type.</typeparam>
/// <typeparam name="TResult">Method call return type.</typeparam>
/// <param name="mock">Mock of <see cref="T"/>.</param>
/// <param name="expression">Method call expression to record.</param>
/// <returns>Method call expression.</returns>
public static Expression<Func<T, TResult>> CallTo<T, TResult>(this Mock<T> mock, Expression<Func<T, TResult>> expression) where T : class
{
return expression;
}
Usage example:
var createMapperCall = mockMappingFactory.CallTo(x => x.CreateMapper());
mockMappingFactory.Setup(createMapperCall).Returns(mockMapper.Object);
mockMappingFactory.Verify(createMapperCall, Times.Once());
I created a utility class that takes care of this:
public class TestUtils
{
private static List<Action> verifyActions = new List<Action>();
public static void InitVerifyActions() => verifyActions = new List<Action>();
public static void VerifyAllSetups()
{
foreach (var action in verifyActions)
{
action.Invoke();
}
}
public static ISetup<T> SetupAndVerify<T>(Mock<T> mock, Expression<Action<T>> expression, Times times) where T : class
{
verifyActions.Add(() => mock.Verify(expression, times));
return mock.Setup(expression);
}
public static ISetup<T, TResult> SetupAndVerify<T, TResult>(Mock<T> mock, Expression<Func<T, TResult>> expression, Times times) where T : class
{
verifyActions.Add(() => mock.Verify(expression, times));
return mock.Setup(expression);
}
}
Then in TestInitialize(), I call TestUtils.InitVerifyActions(), and in the unit tests:
TestUtils.SetupAndVerify(myMock, m => m.Foo("bar"), Times.Once()).Returns("baz");
TestUtils.SetupAndVerify(myOtherMock, m => m.Blah(), Times.Once());
...
TestUtils.VerifyAllSetups();
While far from enough Moq indeed has the AtMost() and AtMostOnce() methods on the Setup call, however it is marked as Obsolete, but it appears to be a mistake according to this GitHub issue

How to get full intellisense tooltip comments working?

I've got some C++/CLI software which is all nice and documented in a C#'ish kind of way which means DOxygen is able to pull it out into some nice html. Is there any way I can get that same information to appear in the intellisense tool tips the way that the .net framework does?
For example, lets say this is my header file (MyApp.h):
/*************** MyApp.h ***************/
/// My namespace containing all my funky classes
namespace MyNamespace
{
using namespace System;
ref class WorldHunger;
/// A truly elegent class which solves all the worlds problems
public ref class MyClass
{
public:
/// Constructs a MyClass
MyClass()
{
}
/// <summary>Attempts to fix world hunger</summary>
/// <param name="problem">The problem to try and fix</param>
/// <returns>Whether or not the problem was solved</param>
bool FixWorldHunger( WorldHunger^ problem );
};
}
...and this it's corresponding implementation:
/*************** MyApp.cpp ***************/
#include "MyApp.h"
using namespace MyNamespace;
MyClass::MyClass()
{
}
bool MyClass::FixWorldHunger( WorldHunger^ problem )
{
bool result = false;
/// TODO: implement something clever
return result;
}
Here's what intellisense does for built in functions when I'm typing:
http://www.geekops.co.uk/photos/0000-00-02%20%28Forum%20images%29/BrokenIntellisense1.jpg
Here's what intellisense does for my own functions when I type:
http://www.geekops.co.uk/photos/0000-00-02%20%28Forum%20images%29/BrokenIntellisense2.jpg
Surely there's a way to do this?
Just to summarise, for this to work you need your comments in a compatible form:
/// <summary>
/// Retrieves the widget at the specified index
/// </summary>
/// <param name="widgetIndex">Index of the widget to retrieve.</param>
/// <returns>The widget at the specified index</returns>
Widget* GetWidget(int widgetIndex);
Then you simply right-click on the project in Visual Studio and go to properties > configuration properties > C/C++ > Output Files and change Generate XML Documentation Files to Yes.
When you rebuild your project ad import it somewhere else, you should see fully documented tooltips appear.

Merge two XElements

I'm not quite sure how to ask this, or if this even exists, but I have a need to merge two XElements with one taking precendence over the other, to become just one element.
The preference here is VB.NET and Linq, but any language would be helpful if it demonstrates how to do this without me coding to manually pick apart and and resolve every single element and attribute.
For example, let's say I have two elements. Humor me on them being as different as they are.
1.
<HockeyPlayer height="6.0" hand="left">
<Position>Center</Position>
<Idol>Gordie Howe</Idol>
</HockeyPlayer>
2.
<HockeyPlayer height="5.9" startinglineup="yes">
<Idol confirmed="yes">Wayne Gretzky</Idol>
</HockeyPlayer>
The result of a merge would be
<HockeyPlayer height="6.0" hand="left" startinglineup="yes">
<Position>Center</Position>
<Idol confirmed="yes">Gordie Howe</Idol>
</HockeyPlayer>
Notice a few things: the height attribute value of #1 overrode #2. The hand attribute and value was simply copied over from #1 (it doesn't exist in #2). The startinglineup attribute and value from #2 was copied over (it doesn't exist in #1). The Position element in #1 was copied over (it doesn't exist in #2). The Idol element value in #1 overrides #2, but #2's attribute of confirmed (it doesn't exist in #1) is copied over.
Net net, #1 takes precendence over #2 where there is a conflict (meaning both have the same elements and/or attributes) and where there is no conflict, they both copy to the final result.
I've tried searching on this, but just can't seem to find anything, possibly because the words I'm using to search are too generic. Any thoughts or solutions (esp. for Linq)?
For the sake of others looking for the same thing, as I assume both the people contributing have long since lost interest... I needed to do something similar but a little more complete. Still not totally complete though, as the XMLDoc says it does not handle non-element content well, but I don't need to as my non-element content is either text or unimportant. Feel free to enhance and re-post...
Oh and it's C# 4.0 as that's what I use...
/// <summary>
/// Provides facilities to merge 2 XElement or XML files.
/// <para>
/// Where the LHS holds an element with non-element content and the RHS holds
/// a tree, the LHS non-element content will be applied as text and the RHS
/// tree ignored.
/// </para>
/// <para>
/// This does not handle anything other than element and text nodes (infact
/// anything other than element is treated as text). Thus comments in the
/// source XML are likely to be lost.
/// </para>
/// <remarks>You can pass <see cref="XDocument.Root"/> if it you have XDocs
/// to work with:
/// <code>
/// XDocument mergedDoc = new XDocument(MergeElements(lhsDoc.Root, rhsDoc.Root);
/// </code></remarks>
/// </summary>
public class XmlMerging
{
/// <summary>
/// Produce an XML file that is made up of the unique data from both
/// the LHS file and the RHS file. Where there are duplicates the LHS will
/// be treated as master
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lhsPath">XML file to base the merge off. This will override
/// the RHS where there are clashes</param>
/// <param name="rhsPath">XML file to enrich the merge with</param>
/// <param name="resultPath">The fully qualified file name in which to
/// write the resulting merged XML</param>
/// <param name="options"> Specifies the options to apply when saving.
/// Default is <see cref="SaveOptions.OmitDuplicateNamespaces"/></param>
public static bool TryMergeXmlFiles(string lhsPath, string rhsPath,
string resultPath, SaveOptions options = SaveOptions.OmitDuplicateNamespaces)
{
try
{
MergeXmlFiles(lhsPath, rhsPath, resultPath);
}
catch (Exception)
{
// could integrate your logging here
return false;
}
return true;
}
/// <summary>
/// Produce an XML file that is made up of the unique data from both the LHS
/// file and the RHS file. Where there are duplicates the LHS will be treated
/// as master
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lhsPath">XML file to base the merge off. This will override
/// the RHS where there are clashes</param>
/// <param name="rhsPath">XML file to enrich the merge with</param>
/// <param name="resultPath">The fully qualified file name in which to write
/// the resulting merged XML</param>
/// <param name="options"> Specifies the options to apply when saving.
/// Default is <see cref="SaveOptions.OmitDuplicateNamespaces"/></param>
public static void MergeXmlFiles(string lhsPath, string rhsPath,
string resultPath, SaveOptions options = SaveOptions.OmitDuplicateNamespaces)
{
XElement result =
MergeElements(XElement.Load(lhsPath), XElement.Load(rhsPath));
result.Save(resultPath, options);
}
/// <summary>
/// Produce a resulting <see cref="XElement"/> that is made up of the unique
/// data from both the LHS element and the RHS element. Where there are
/// duplicates the LHS will be treated as master
/// </summary>
/// <param name="lhs">XML Element tree to base the merge off. This will
/// override the RHS where there are clashes</param>
/// <param name="rhs">XML element tree to enrich the merge with</param>
/// <returns>A merge of the left hand side and right hand side element
/// trees treating the LHS as master in conflicts</returns>
public static XElement MergeElements(XElement lhs, XElement rhs)
{
// if either of the sides of the merge are empty then return the other...
// if they both are then we return null
if (rhs == null) return lhs;
if (lhs == null) return rhs;
// Otherwise build a new result based on the root of the lhs (again lhs
// is taken as master)
XElement result = new XElement(lhs.Name);
MergeAttributes(result, lhs.Attributes(), rhs.Attributes());
// now add the lhs child elements merged to the RHS elements if there are any
MergeSubElements(result, lhs, rhs);
return result;
}
/// <summary>
/// Enrich the passed in <see cref="XElement"/> with the contents of both
/// attribute collections.
/// Again where the RHS conflicts with the LHS, the LHS is deemed the master
/// </summary>
/// <param name="elementToUpdate">The element to take the merged attribute
/// collection</param>
/// <param name="lhs">The master set of attributes</param>
/// <param name="rhs">The attributes to enrich the merge</param>
private static void MergeAttributes(XElement elementToUpdate,
IEnumerable<XAttribute> lhs, IEnumerable<XAttribute> rhs)
{
// Add in the attribs of the lhs... we will only add new attribs from
// the rhs duplicates will be ignored as lhs is master
elementToUpdate.Add(lhs);
// collapse the element names to save multiple evaluations... also why
// we ain't putting this in as a sub-query
List<XName> lhsAttributeNames =
lhs.Select(attribute => attribute.Name).ToList();
// so add in any missing attributes
elementToUpdate.Add(rhs.Where(attribute =>
!lhsAttributeNames.Contains(attribute.Name)));
}
/// <summary>
/// Enrich the passed in <see cref="XElement"/> with the contents of both
/// <see cref="XElement.Elements()"/> subtrees.
/// Again where the RHS conflicts with the LHS, the LHS is deemed the master.
/// Where the passed elements do not have element subtrees, but do have text
/// content that will be used. Again the LHS will dominate
/// </summary>
/// <remarks>Where the LHS has text content and no subtree, but the RHS has
/// a subtree; the LHS text content will be used and the RHS tree ignored.
/// This may be unexpected but is consistent with other .NET XML
/// operations</remarks>
/// <param name="elementToUpdate">The element to take the merged element
/// collection</param>
/// <param name="lhs">The element from which to extract the master
/// subtree</param>
/// <param name="rhs">The element from which to extract the subtree to
/// enrich the merge</param>
private static void MergeSubElements(XElement elementToUpdate,
XElement lhs, XElement rhs)
{
// see below for the special case where there are no children on the LHS
if (lhs.Elements().Count() > 0)
{
// collapse the element names to a list to save multiple evaluations...
// also why we ain't putting this in as a sub-query later
List<XName> lhsElementNames =
lhs.Elements().Select(element => element.Name).ToList();
// Add in the elements of the lhs and merge in any elements of the
//same name on the RHS
elementToUpdate.Add(
lhs.Elements().Select(
lhsElement =>
MergeElements(lhsElement, rhs.Element(lhsElement.Name))));
// so add in any missing elements from the rhs
elementToUpdate.Add(rhs.Elements().Where(element =>
!lhsElementNames.Contains(element.Name)));
}
else
{
// special case for elements where they have no element children
// but still have content:
// use the lhs text value if it is there
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(lhs.Value))
{
elementToUpdate.Value = lhs.Value;
}
// if it isn't then see if we have any children on the right
else if (rhs.Elements().Count() > 0)
{
// we do so shove them in the result unaltered
elementToUpdate.Add(rhs.Elements());
}
else
{
// nope then use the text value (doen't matter if it is empty
//as we have nothing better elsewhere)
elementToUpdate.Value = rhs.Value;
}
}
}
}
Here's a console app that produces the result listed in your question. It uses recursion to process each sub element. The one thing it doesn't check for is child elements that appear in Elem2 that aren't in Elem1, but hopefully this will get you started towards a solution.
I'm not sure if I would say this is the best possible solution, but it does work.
Module Module1
Function MergeElements(ByVal Elem1 As XElement, ByVal Elem2 As XElement) As XElement
If Elem2 Is Nothing Then
Return Elem1
End If
Dim result = New XElement(Elem1.Name)
For Each attr In Elem1.Attributes
result.Add(attr)
Next
Dim Elem1AttributeNames = From attr In Elem1.Attributes _
Select attr.Name
For Each attr In Elem2.Attributes
If Not Elem1AttributeNames.Contains(attr.Name) Then
result.Add(attr)
End If
Next
If Elem1.Elements().Count > 0 Then
For Each elem In Elem1.Elements
result.Add(MergeElements(elem, Elem2.Element(elem.Name)))
Next
Else
result.Value = Elem1.Value
End If
Return result
End Function
Sub Main()
Dim Elem1 = <HockeyPlayer height="6.0" hand="left">
<Position>Center</Position>
<Idol>Gordie Howe</Idol>
</HockeyPlayer>
Dim Elem2 = <HockeyPlayer height="5.9" startinglineup="yes">
<Idol confirmed="yes">Wayne Gretzky</Idol>
</HockeyPlayer>
Console.WriteLine(MergeElements(Elem1, Elem2))
Console.ReadLine()
End Sub
End Module
Edit: I just noticed that the function was missing As XElement. I'm actually surprised that it worked without that! I work with VB.NET every day, but it has some quirks that I still don't totally understand.