Postsharp - Adding OnMethodBoundaryAspect to abstract Method - Aspect Not Firing - c#-4.0

I'm trying to implement an OnMethodBoundary aspect on an abstract method in an abstract class so that all types that inherit from this class will automatically have the aspect applied. There are no compilation errors or warnings, but the OnEntry method doesn't fire. Note: If I apply the aspect to a non-abstract method, everything works fine
here's the aspect example:
[Serializable]
[MulticastAttributeUsage(MulticastTargets.Method, Inheritance = MulticastInheritance.Multicast)]
public sealed class DoSomethingAttribute : OnMethodBoundaryAspect
{
public override void OnEntry(MethodExecutionArgs args)
{
//Do work
}
}
// here's the abstract class
public abstract class Job
{
//...
[DoSomething]
public abstract void Run();
}

Updated answer: it doesn't matter where anything is, as long as both projects have Postsharp referenced then you're good to go.
It works just fine. Which version of PostSharp are you using?
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
Job1 j = new Job1();
j.Run();
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
[Serializable]
[MulticastAttributeUsage(MulticastTargets.Method, Inheritance = MulticastInheritance.Multicast)]
public sealed class DoSomethingAttribute : OnMethodBoundaryAspect
{
public override void OnEntry(MethodExecutionArgs args)
{
Console.WriteLine("OnEntry");
}
}
public abstract class Job
{
//...
[DoSomething]
public abstract void Run();
}
public class Job1 : Job
{
public override void Run()
{
Console.WriteLine("Run method");
}
}
Results:
OnEntry
Run method

Related

Unable to use protected method override in Acumatica Graph Extension

I'm attempting to create a graph extension to modify the behavior of one of the mobile scan screens, and I found in developer release notes for 2020 R1 the ability to use the [PXProtectedAccess] attribute to utilize protected members of a Graph from the extension, even though it does not directly inherit from it.
However, in order to utilize this, the Graph Extension class needs to be abstract and Acumatica no longer seems to recognize it when I do so. I'm sure that I am missing a crucial piece here but I can't figure out what it is based on documentation. EDIT: I was missing the [PXProtectedAccess] attribute on the class itself.
Now I am seeing something else when I try to actually call the abstract method. It throws Unable to cast object of type 'Wrapper.PX.Objects.IN.Cst_INScanIssueHost' to type 'INScanIssueHostDynamicInterface'. when I attempt to call any one of these protected members. I'm not sure what INScanIssueHostDynamicInterface refers to or how to resolve the type conflicts here.
Here is an excerpt of the code I'm using:
[PXProtectedAccess]
public abstract class INScanIssue_Extension : PXGraphExtension<INScanIssue, INScanIssueHost>
{
[PXProtectedAccess]
protected abstract void ReportError(string errorMsg, params object[] args);
public delegate void ProcessConfirmDelegate();
[PXOverride]
public virtual void ProcessConfirm(ProcessConfirmDelegate baseMethod)
{
ReportError("TEST");
}
}
I think you are on the right path. Your graphExtension should be abstract. Also please note that on your extension you use protected member of the graph extension by specifying the parameter of the attribute, as shown below:
public class MyGraph : PXGraph<MyGraph>
{
protected void Bar() { }
}
public class MyExt : PXGraphExtension<MyGraph>
{
protected void Foo() { }
}
[PXProtectedAccess]
public abstract class MySecondLevelExt : PXGraphExtension<MyExt, MyGraph>
{
[PXProtectedAccess]
protected abstract void Bar();
[PXProtectedAccess(typeof(MyExt))]
protected abstract void Foo();
}
So in your case, I think you can try to add that parameter to the ProctectedAccess attribute for those members that from INScanIssue(or overriden there ):
namespace PX.Objects.IN
{
[PXProtectedAccess]
public abstract class INScanIssue_Extension : PXGraphExtension<INScanIssue,
INScanIssueHost>
{
public static bool IsActive()
{
return true;
}
# region Protected Access
*[PXProtectedAccess(typeof(INScanIssue))]*
protected abstract void ClearHeaderInfo(bool redirect = false);
[PXProtectedAccess]
protected abstract void SetScanState(string state, string message = null, params object[] args);
[PXProtectedAccess(typeof(INScanIssue))]
protected abstract bool PromptLocationForEveryLine { get; }
........................................
Use the abstract extension only to access the protected members, then add a second level extension, that calls the exposed members from your first level extension. And I don't think you need to apply the attribute on the extension.
public abstract class INScanIssueProtectedAccessExt : PXGraphExtension<INScanIssue, INScanIssueHost>
{
[PXProtectedAccess]
public abstract void ReportError(string errorMsg, params object[] args);
}
public class INScanIssue_Extension : PXGraphExtension<INScanIssueProtectedAccessExt, INScanIssue, INScanIssueHost>
{
public delegate void ProcessConfirmDelegate();
[PXOverride]
public virtual void ProcessConfirm(ProcessConfirmDelegate baseMethod)
{
this.Base2.ReportError("TEST");
}
}

Mono.Cecil: How to replace base class

I have some classes Like the following:
public class MvxEventSourceActivity : Activity
{
protected override void MethodA()
{
DoSomething();
base.MethodA();
}
}
public class MvxActivity : MvxEventSourceActivity
{
...
}
There are a bunch of different subclasses of Activity and right now I have to make an MvxEventSource/MvxActivity pair for each one (Example: MvxEventSourceListActivity/MvxListActivity that wraps the class ListActivity which inherits from Activity. If I was using C++ I could use CRTP to do something like the following:
public class MvxEventSourceActivity<TActivity> : TActivity
where TActivity : Activity
{
protected override void MethodA()
{
DoSomething();
base.MethodA();
}
}
public class MvxActivity : MvxEventSourceActivity<Activity>
{
...
}
But this is C# and I can't do that. How would I go about using Fody to do something like that?

MS TEst: Method not executed when base class is generic

Not duplicate of: Inherited test class from generic base is ignored in MSTest
In my case, the test classes are in the same namespace/assembly.
When unittesting classes which have a lot in common, I would like to use a base test class with a generic parameter. I have boiled the problem down to the following, where my base test method is not being executed, but ONLY in the generic case.
Non-generic: Base test method is EXECUTED:
[TestClass]
public class DerivedTestClass : BaseUnitTest
{
protected override string ReturnMeSomething(object obj)
{
return "test1" + obj.ToString();
}
[TestMethod]
public void derived_test()
{
// This is executed
}
}
[TestClass]
public abstract class BaseUnitTest
{
[TestMethod]
public void base_test()
{
// This is executed
}
protected abstract string ReturnMeSomething(object obj);
}
Generic: Base test method in generic base class is NOT EXECUTED:
[TestClass]
public class DerivedTestClass : BaseUnitTest<string>
{
protected override string ReturnMeSomething(string s)
{
return "test1" + s;
}
[TestMethod]
public void derived_test()
{
// This is executed
}
}
[TestClass]
public abstract class BaseUnitTest<T>
{
[TestMethod]
public void base_test()
{
// This is NOT executed
}
protected abstract string ReturnMeSomething(T t);
}
Can anyone tell me the reason for this?
After a few days, this suddenly works (!!). If anyone ever experiences this same, odd behavior, please write a comment here. I would suggest anyone to reboot and clean+rebuild everything and try again.

NServiceBus Configuration with Custom Container

I am trying to re-use the service registrations in an assembly that I use through a few services in my solution. I follow the example listed from the NServiceBus website to implement the solution. When following that, unless I add the IWantCustomInitialization interface, my Init method (and IoC container implementation) appears not to function. When I have that interface implemented, I get exceptions (listed in SO questions here and here). I can't seem to get it to work that there are no exceptions AND the dependencies in my MessageHandler are being populated properly. Here is my current EndpointConfig implementation.
[EndpointSLA("00:00:30")]
public class EndpointConfig : IConfigureThisEndpoint, AsA_Server, UsingTransport<Msmq>, INeedInitialization {
public void Init() {
Configure.With().ObjectBuilderAdapter();
}
}
public class ObjectBuilderAdapter : IContainer {
readonly IDependencyInjector injector;
public ObjectBuilderAdapter(IDependencyInjectionBuilder dependencyInjectionBuilder) {
injector = dependencyInjectionBuilder.Create(); //This method does all the common service registrations that I am trying to re-use
//injector.RegisterType<ExtractIncomingPrincipal, PrincipalExtractor>();
}
public void Dispose() {
injector.Dispose();
}
public object Build(Type typeToBuild) {
return injector.Resolve(typeToBuild);
}
public IContainer BuildChildContainer() {
return new ObjectBuilderAdapter(new DependencyInjectorBuilder());
}
public IEnumerable<object> BuildAll(Type typeToBuild) {
return injector.ResolveAll(typeToBuild);
}
public void Configure(Type component, DependencyLifecycle dependencyLifecycle) {
injector.RegisterType(component);
}
public void Configure<T>(Func<T> component, DependencyLifecycle dependencyLifecycle) {
injector.RegisterType(component);
}
public void ConfigureProperty(Type component, string property, object value) {
if (injector is AutofacDependencyInjector) {
((AutofacDependencyInjector)injector).ConfigureProperty(component, property, value);
} else {
Debug.WriteLine("Configuring {0} for property {1} but we don't handle this scenario.", component.Name, property);
}
}
public void RegisterSingleton(Type lookupType, object instance) {
injector.RegisterInstance(lookupType, instance);
}
public bool HasComponent(Type componentType) {
return injector.IsRegistered(componentType);
}
public void Release(object instance) { }
}
public static class Extensions {
public static Configure ObjectBuilderAdapter(this Configure config) {
ConfigureCommon.With(config, new ObjectBuilderAdapter(new DependencyInjectorBuilder()));
return config;
}
}
Note: When I use the INeedInitialization interface, I get the ComponentNotRegisteredException when it's looking for IStartableBus.
When you are trying to swap the built in container, then you need to implement IWantCustomInitialization in the same class that implements IConfigureThisEndpoint.
You can use your own container and register all your types in there and tell NSB to use that container.
For example:
public class EndpointConfig : IConfigureThisEndpoint, AsA_Server, IWantCustomInitialization
{
public void Init()
{
var container = new ContainerBuilder().Build();
Configure.With()
.AutofacBuilder(container);
}
}

Have to prove base class property invariant in all derived classes?

I have a base class in which I'm trying to use the Null Object pattern to provide a default logger implementation which can then be changed by IoC setter injection at a later stage.
public interface ILog
{
void Log(string message);
}
public class NoOpLogger: ILog
{
public void Log(string message)
{ }
}
public abstract class ClassWithLogger
{
private ILog _logger = new NoOpLogger();
protected ClassWithLogger()
{
Contract.Assert(Logger != null);
}
public ILog Logger
{
get { return _logger; }
set
{
Contract.Requires(value != null);
_logger = value;
Contract.Assert(Logger != null);
}
}
[ContractInvariantMethod]
private void ObjectInvariant()
{
Contract.Invariant(Logger != null);
}
}
public sealed class DerivedClass : ClassWithLogger
{
private readonly string _test;
public DerivedClass(string test)
{
Contract.Requires<ArgumentException>(!String.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(test));
_test = test;
// I get warning at end of ctor: "invariant unproven: Logger != null"
}
public void SomeMethod()
{
Logger.Log("blah");
}
}
As I indicate in the code, my issue is that I get a warning at the end of the derived class' constructor saying that the "Logger != null" object invariant from the base class has not been proven even though it's obvious nothing has changed the Logger property value and I also have contracts around the setter to ensure it can never be null anyway.
Is there any way to avoid having to reprove this fact in all derived classes, or is this just a limitation of the static analyser?
UPDATE: Problem has been fixed in latest version of CodeContracts. Also, I don't need the assert in the abstract base class constructor anymore (the line "Contract.Assert(Logger != null);")
I just tested your code as posted and it worked fine. Are you using the most recent version of Code Contracts (1.4.30707.2)?

Resources