We like the Warnings as Errors setting as we have a policy of not checking in code with warnings and this is the only effective way we have found to enforce it.
We also like to use the Obsolete attribute to flag methods that should not be used any more.
Problem is that adding a Obsolete attribute to a method or class immediately causes tons of projects to not build (not to mention problems if a .NET API call is deprecated).
Does anyone have a good solution to this?
We want a visible, hard-to-ignore indicator that you are using a deprecated API but that does not cause the build to fail. We want to see the warnings in the IDE and in CI builds.
A simple solution would be to have a build configuration (e.g. your debug build configuration) without warnings as errors. If, however, the point is to flag to your developers that something is wrong on build, that's no good as they'll forget to do a release build before they check in.
Alternately, rather than using "warnings as errors" you could set up your ruleset to throw errors itself rather than raise warnings. This will mean, of course, that non-CA warnings won't cause errors.
The best solution, I think, would be to handle it on the server side. Ideally you'd have some sort of gated checkin so that your code repository rejects commits that don't build using its build definition (with warnings-as-errors on, and your developers can leave warnings-as-errors off). I suspect that's a TFS-2k10-only feature though.
This other stack overflow post should help:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/468166/9195608
Basically it says:
You can add a WarningsNotAsErrors-tag in the project file.
<PropertyGroup>
...
...
<WarningsNotAsErrors>612,618</WarningsNotAsErrors>
</PropertyGroup>
Note: 612 and 618 are both warnings about Obsolete
The difference between 612 and 618 is the comment of the ObsoleteAttribute. An ObsoleteAttribute without comment generates the error 612, and one with a comment generates 618.
As explained here /sdl (Enable Additional Security Checks), if you switch off SDL the compiler will treat it as a warning.
Related
I am hacking around a problem we've created for ourselves. What I would like to do is log a warning in our TFS builds for any code that is instantiating a specific class. I don't want a run time warning (I've got one in place already), I want a build time warning that ProjectX is using BadClass.cs. The idea being it will give us an additional place to see things that need to be fixed once our hack is no longer needed.
So something like this:
public class BadClass
{}
public class OkClass
{}
public class MyBadService
{
var a = new BadClass(); <-- Logs a warning to the build output
}
public class MyOkService
{
var a = new OkClass(); <-- Does not log a warning
}
Edit:
I do not like the idea of using Obsolete; its a misnomer. We've already got code with Obsolete attributes and this would get lost in the noise. I don't want a generic warning that I can't control the message for. I want bright neon signs with klaxons firing and a thousand exclamation points in the message. Basically everything I can do short of failing the build. I'm using the #warning precompiler directive right now and its mostly doing what I want but it requires a human to remember to add the warning. I'm looking for something more automagic. I've seen third party libraries do stuff like this so I know its possible.
Why not just use the Obsolete attribute? It can generate a build warning for you:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.obsoleteattribute?view=netframework-4.8
You can even make it emit an error too if you want.
The answer could be negative I think.
It seems that you use or call msbuild.exe to build your C# projects. But as far as I know, MSBuild in fact calls csc.exe to build C# projects in build time.
So actually what you want is logging a warning when the compiler compile the C# code if it recognize somewhere in your code uses the BadClass in build time.
If you have the source code of BadClass in the same solution, add a project reference format to the xx.csproj which contains BadClass, and set a #warning in the BadClass it may generate the warning in build time.
But I think the scenario you're in is something like: You developed one Assembly and distribute it to your user, so you want it generates a warning when the user calls one BadClass in your assembly and builds his own project to remind him of taking care when using this bad class. If so, this is impossible for msbuild AFAIK. If I misunderstand anything, feel free to know me know :)
Update:
As Daniel and Johnson said, ObsoleteAttribute is enough to do this. Though no valid way to generate warnings from msbuild aspect directly, but msbuild will call C# compiler during build process, so generates a compiler warning can output to build output window.
I am using VS2010.I was changed my project and its dependent projects .Net Framework to 4.0 from 3.5.Now I could not attach the process,due to this I am not able to debug the code.
I have cleaned all the bin folders and rebuild the projects ,but still I am having following error.
Please help me to resolve this..
I'm not sure what the question is here. The error message clearly tells you that you need to
Turn off (disable) optimizations
Turn on (enable) debug info
Rebuild your project so those changes take effect.
Apparently you only did step #3.
Also see vs2010 debugging module was built without debugging information?, which may provide more information.
I also received this error, and did all the right things as described above - those have been my settings all along anyway. I even went so far as deleting the assembly from the long C:\Users... path in the error message - it still didn't cause that message to go away.
Then I tried putting a breakpoint in the source, which should not be allowed if the module really WAS built without debug information. And then ran the program and it stopped at the break point and I could do all the usual debugging.
So right now I'm just ignoring the message. I could do as suggested and disable the 'Warn if no user code on launch' option as suggested in the message, but I'm not doing that until I can spend some time working out why the message comes up at all.
Uncheck this option in Visual Studio 2012.This would solve this issue
The Crystal libraries referenced by our winform app cause errors in Code Analysis:
Warning 1 CA0060 : The indirectly-referenced assembly
'BusinessObjects.Licensing.KeycodeDecoder, Version=13.0.2000.0,
Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=692fbea5521e1304' could not be found.
This assembly is not required for analysis, however, analysis results
could be incomplete. This assembly was referenced by: C:\Program
Files\SAP BusinessObjects\Crystal Reports for .NET Framework
4.0\Common\SAP BusinessObjects Enterprise XI 4.0\win32_x86\dotnet\CrystalDecisions.CrystalReports.Engine.dll.
In a few different threads, SAP "support" has acknowledged that this is a problem on their end (http://scn.sap.com/thread/2153539), though they are quick to point out it doesn't impact their product directly, so fixing it is of low-priority. It's been assigned reference number ADAPT01629826, but it still seems up-in-the-air as to when they'll actually fix the issue on their end.
This is a Code Analysis Application Warning (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms245349.aspx), rather than a normal Code Analysis Warning.
Because of that, Visual Studio doesn't provide the usual "Suppress Message(s)" context menu. I'm hoping there's a way to use GlobalSuppressions or something similar, but could use some help...
Even if SAP is right about the bad assembly reference not having a functional impact on their product, it still bothers me. Like the original poster, I don't want any errors/warnings from Code Analysis.
I'm sure others have run into this -- or at least something similar. How did you handle it? Is there a way to exclude this specific warning from Code Analysis, so it no longer shows?
While I don't like hard-coding exclusions, it seems like a more reliable solution than waiting around for SAP to actually push out a fix.
There is no way to suppress these without wrapping fxcpcmd or overwriting the code analysis targets to intercept the output and ignore the warning.
I made a simple change of a property to an auto property and broke the build because the property was referenced in a conditional compilation section. I was building in debug and the reference was in a section of code that's only compiled in release configuration. Is there any way to catch these errors without manually switching the build configuration in Visual Studio and building in each mode?
I have a CI server so the error was caught right away but I hate breaking the build.
You need to build each configuration to see if something conditional breaks one of them. You can avoid the manual step using the 'batch build' option from the build menu though.
You have to build under each configuration.
Remember that if you were to use all the conditional compiled sections at the same time, its likely that it wouldn't build i.e. if is debug use a, if not use b.
You don't need to do it manually though - that said, double compilation time is an awful thing.
I am trying to add assert statements to a project, but they keep being skipped. Is there an option I need to enable somewhere?
The assert statement is:
Debug.Assert(false, "Deserialization failed", "Deserialization failed");
And I am running in debug mode. I could be doing something silly; I am not sure.
Make sure the DEBUG conditional compilation symbol is defined. In VS2008 that's on the project's property page on the Build tab: "Define DEBUG constant". This should be the case by default for a debug build, but it's possible that it got switched off.
It may be set/unset in similar but different ways in other IDEs (possibly with an edit control instead of a checkbox).
It's also possible (but rather unlikely) that it is being disabled by a configuration file setting, either with an <assert assertuienabled="false" /> setting or because the DefaultTraceListener has been removed from the Listeners collection. See the documentation for the Debug.Assert() method for more details if you think this might be what's going on.