Ok, before I begin I realize that there is a lot of documentation on this subject but I have thus far failed to get even basic colourization working for VS2010.
My goal is to simply get to a point where I can open a document and everything is coloured red, from here I can implement the relevant parsing logic.
Here's what I have tried/found:
1) Downloaded all the relevent SDK's and such- Found the ook sample (http://code.msdn.microsoft.com/ookLanguage) - didn't build, didn't work.
2) Knowing almost nothing about MEF read through "Implementing a Language Service By Using the Managed Package Framework" - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb166533(v=VS.100).aspx
This was pretty much a copy and paste of all the basic stuff here, and also updating some references which were out of date with the sample see: http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/vsx/thread/a310fe67-afd2-4592-b295-3fc86fec7996
Now, I have got to a point where when running the package MEF appears to have hooked up correctly (I know this because with the debugger open I can see that the packages initialize and FDoIdle methods are being hit).
When I open a file of the extension I have registered with the ProvideLanguageExtensionAttribute everything dies as if in an endless loop, yet no debug symbols hit (though they are loaded).
Looking at the ook sample and the MEF examples they seem to be totally different approaches to the same problem. In the ook sample there are notions of Clasifications and Completion controllers which aren't mentioned in the MEF example. Also, they don't seem to create a Package or Language service, so I have no idea how it should work?
With the MEF example, my assumption is that I need to hook into the "IScanner.ScanTokenAndProvideInfoAboutIt" to provide syntax highlighting? Which would be fine if I could ever hit this method.
So my first question I guess is which approach should I be taking here? Or do they both somehow tie together?
My second questions is, where can I find a basic fully working project that implements bog standard basic syntax highlighting and intellisense or VS2010?
Thirdly, in the MEF example when I created a Package there were a bunch of test projects created for me. I appears that the integration tests launch the VS2010 test rig somehow, but the test fails. It would be good to write my service with tests but I have no idea what/how I can test each interaction so any references to testing Language services would be helpful.
Finally, please throw any resource/book links my way that I may find useful.
Cheers, Chris.
N.B. Sorry I realize this is part question part rant, but I have never been so confused.
First, the package example is not using MEF. Essentially everyplace that you mention MEF in your question is not actually MEF, but the managed package framework (MPF), also colloquially called the managed language service (MLS). You'd know if your extension was using MEF by two things: the vsixmanifest lists your assembly as containing a MEF component, and you see [Export] and [Import] attributes in the code.
The easiest way to do this is to use MEF. Since you have the SDK installed, you also have a template for an editor classifier project (under C# (or VB)->Extensibility->Editor classifier in the New Project dialog). You can certainly do this with a language service/colorizer/package, but there will be significantly more code than the equivalent classifier.
The Ook solution is the sample for this and should work; if it doesn't build/work, then can you send me email (noahric at microsoft) with what errors you are seeing so I can email the owner of that sample?
In general, you should also read my answer for the question on "How can I write a plugin for VS2010 using MEF?". That has links to other resources that should help.
Related
As an enthusiasting refactorer, there's an IntelliJ feature that I love: "Refactor --> Change signature".
Basically, you have a function and you can decide to remove a parameter or add a new one, setting a default value. This is so convenient, so beautiful, and I dearly love it.
So when I got involved in an oldschool UFT project with maintenance tasks, I felt jaded.
It there a way to achieve this without changing each and every instance of the function? Please tell me yes. Please!
Well, no. I don´t know of any tool capable of this.
There seem to be people who created a C# adapter for the UFT test object API, enabling them to write their tests in C#, and to use VisualStudio for development of test scripts. In VS, you have the refactoring support you look for. But you don´t create UFT scripts anymore, you´d create C# apps. (Note I am not talking about the API testing aspect of UFT, which uses C# anyways -- I am talking about the VBScript test scripts for GUI tests and BPT components.)
UFT itself is not capable of doing real static code analysis. (Let this statement drown a minute, and you´ll agree: it´s true.)
Adding this to the fact that the UFT´s IDE is, let´s say: sub-optimal, this led to the development of Test Design Studio (TDS), a VisualStudio "feel-alike" subset of VS for UFT (VBScript) scripts. You can check it out here: http://www.patterson-consulting.net/products/test_design_studio/Default.aspx
Among other things, TDS does static code analysis for UFT scripts in a pretty complete way (as far as an interpreted variant-typed language like VBScript allows that at all), and the author of the tool seems to be thinking about adding refactoring features like the one you asked for, but -- this has not happened yet. It will probably come only if demand is high.
Until then, TDS could help you:
You could simply change the signature
If TDS knows all calls (which is usually does), it will list you all locations where you need to edit -- and this happens at design-time, not at runtime
TDS allows you to specify the type of identifiers, for example: formal parameters, variables, and so on. This means you might even get warnings if you change nothing about the pure VBScript signature (which does not include type information), but do change the TDS directive of that signature parameter of which you changed the type.
This is no advertisement. I am not part of the company that developed TDS.
This is just an honest answer to the (slightly offtopic) question that I wish would have gotten years ago, asking questions like yours, and it proved to be a real lifesaver.
In summary, TDS quadrupled (or more) my productivity when creating and maintaining test scripts, especially if a large base framework is used. So I´d recommend checking out the option of using TDS to better handle changes like the ones you outlined.
background
I have designed many tools in the past year or so that is designed to help me program for XPages. These tools include primarily helper java classes, extended logging (making use of OpenLogger and my own stuff), and a few other things that I personally feel I cannot work without. It has been discussed with my employer, and we feel that it might be a good idea to start publishing these items to openNTF. Since these tools are made up of about 3 .nsfs, all designed to use the same java code, key javascript classes, css, and even a custom control or two, I would like to consolidate key items into a plug-in that can be installed at the server and client level. I want to do this consolidation before I even think about publishing any of the work I've done so far. It would just be far too much work to maintain, not just for me, but for potential users. I have not really found any information on how to do such a thing in google searches. I also have to make sure that I am able to make use of the ExtLib libraries, openNTF Domino API, and the Notes API.
my questions
How does one best go about designing such plug-ins? Must a designer
use eclipse, or is this it possible to do this directly in the Notes
Designer?
How does a designer best go about keeping a server and client up to date while designing and updating the plug-in code? Is this why GitHub is often used?
Where is the best place to get material to get started in this direction? I sort of feel lost in the woods, knowing I need to head north, but not having a compass for that first step.
Thank you very much for your input.
In my experience, I found that diving into plug-in development is a huge PITA until you get used to it, but it's definitely worth it overall.
As for whether you can use Designer for plugin development: yes, but you will likely eventually want to not do so. I started out by using Designer for this sort of thing for a while, presumably with the same sentiment as you: why bother installing another instance of Eclipse when I'm already sitting in one all day? However, between Designer's age (it's roughly equivalent to, I think, Eclipse 3.4), oddities when it comes to working sets between the "Applications" and "Project Explorer" views, and, in my case, my desire to use a Mac app, I ended up switching.
There are two major starting points: the XSP Starter Kit (http://www.openntf.org/internal/home.nsf/project.xsp?name=XSP%20Starter%20Kit) and Niklas Heidloff's video on setting up Eclipse for XPages development (http://www.openntf.org/main.nsf/blog.xsp?permaLink=NHEF-8RVB5H). The latter mentions the XPages SDK (http://www.openntf.org/internal/home.nsf/project.xsp?name=XPages%20SDK%20for%20Eclipse%20RCP), which is also useful. In my setup, I found the video largely useful, but some aspects either difficult to find (IBM's downloads are shifting sands) or optional (debugging, which will depend on whether or not you're using Eclipse on Windows).
Those resources should generally get you set up. The main thing to worry about when setting up your Eclipse environment will be making sure your Plug-In Execution Environment is properly done. If you're following the SDK setup instructions, that SHOULD get you where you need to be.
The next thing to know about is the way plugins are structured. Each plugin you want to install in Designer or Domino will also be paired with a feature project (a feature can house several plugins), and potentially an update site - the last one is optional if you just want to import the features into an Update Site NSF. That's how I often do my normal plugin development: export the paired feature to a directory and then import the feature into the server's Update Site NSF and then install in Designer from there using Application -> Install. You can also set things up so that you deploy into the server's plugin/feature directories instead of taking the step of installing into an update site if you'd prefer. GitHub doesn't really come into play for this aspect - it's more about sharing/collaborating with your code and also having a remote storage location for your git repositories (which I highly advise).
And as for the "lost in the woods" feeling: yep, you'll have that for a good while. There are lots of moving parts and esoteric concepts to get a hold of all at once. If you mostly follow the above links and then start with some basics from the XSP Starter Kit (which is itself a plugin project that you can pair with a feature) - say, printing text in the Activator class and making an implicit global variable just to make sure it works - that should help get your feet wet.
It's best done in Eclipse. You can debug your code running on the server from there, as well as run it directly from there. The editors are also more up-to-date. You want:
Eclipse for RCP and RAP developers
XPages SDK for Eclipse RCP (from OpenNTF)
XPages Debug Plugin (from OpenNTF - basically allows you to load the plugins to the Domino server dynamically, rather than exporting to an Update Site all the time)
XSP Starter Kit on OpenNTF is a good starting point for a plugin. There are various references to the library id, which has to be unique for your plugin. Basically, references to org.openntf.xsp.starter need changing to whatever you want to call your plugin. You're also best advised to remove what you don't need. I tend to work in a copy of the Starter, remove stuff, build and if there are errors with required classes (Activator.java obviously will be required and some others), then paste them back in from the Starter.
XPages OpenLog Logger is a good cross-reference, that was built from XPages Starter Kit. It's pretty much stripped down and you'll be able to see what had to be changed. A lot of the elements of the XSP Starter Kit correspond to Java classes you'll probably be familiar with from your XPages Java development.
GitHub etc tend to be used as source control, which is useful for working out what's changed from time to time.
We have a very old application dating back to ASP era which we are gradually refactoring to ASP.NET + VB.NET codebase.
It contains a lots of files with the below types:
aspx, asmx, ascx, vb, js (JavaScript), html, vbs (VBScript).
The backend database is SQL Server 2005 with lots of sprocs.
We would like to create a code documentation automatically generated from the comments in the code files. I liked Doxygen very much but seems like it does not support the above technologies. Can you please suggest some document generator tools, preferably a single tool or a group of tools?
Thanks a lot.
Ajit.
You can take a look at Microsoft's Sandcastle tool. I've used it many times, and it generates documentation based on the comments provided in your .NET code. If I remember correctly, it can also generate documentation for JavaScript libraries.
There are some out there:
SandCastle
NDOC
i've used SandCastle and it works too good if you have xml comments in your code.
You first enable xml documentation in your project by setting it in Project Properties -> Compile -> Generate XML Documentation.
Once done you may have to set treat warnings as errors, so that the studio can point out to you where and all the XML comments are missing.
To add an XML Comment, you place your cursor before a class definition or a function definition and type
///
This will automatically generate xml tags for documentation and then once you are done, you can import the project and start to build the documentation.
The good part is, if you have documented your classes well, when you use those functions in your application upon mouse over you can find the description which you wrote, much like how intellisense documentation works.
Let me know if you run into any other issues.
My last suggestion, make a hello world project and xml document it and get used to sandcastle with it.
I apologize. This is part rant, part question.
For the rant: Dear MS developers who post MVC projects on CodePlex and dedicate their sites to MVC with TDD: I love to learn from you and thanks for the examples, but not everyone has Pro. I'm sick of not being able to load the test project portion of these things because use Standard, which more than covers most needs [with Nunit]. It's annoying.
Now, for the question. :-)
Is there a tool out there to convert these unit test projects to a proj file Studio Standard can open so I can at least compile and view the code?
--
P.S. Dear Microsoft: Enough with not including unit testing with all versions of Studio already. It's silly. Testing is not just an "enterprise" or "pro" feature.
In most cases, switching between test frameworks is just a case of search/replace. If the csproj doesn't load, just create a new project file and drag the code files in and fix them afterwards (along with the references). TestDriven.NET, for example (or NUnit console) are perfectly happy with just a dll/exe as the test project.
Maybe a pain, but not necessarily a huge problem.
If you want to use NUnit with MVC, there are brief instructions here and here - I don't know (haven't tested) whether they apply to Standard.
Does anybody use the Class Designer much in Visual Studio?
I have downloaded the Modeling Power Toys for 2005 and have been impressed with what I've seen so far. The MSDN Class Designer Blog doesn't seem to have been updated for a while but it still looks quite useful.
Is the Class Designer a quick way to build the basic application or should I just work out on paper and then start coding?
Thanks
As a visualization tool, or for exploratory purposes (drawing up multiple options to see what they look like) it's not bad, but generally I find the object browser does fine for most stuff I care about.
As a code generation tool, it's a terrible idea.
The whole idea that we will design all our code structure first, then fill in the blanks with small bits of implementation is fundamentally broken.
The only time you actually know what the code structure should look like, is if you've done the exact same thing before - however then you can just use your previous code, and you don't need to draw up any new code in any kind of designer.
If you decide ahead of time to use a particular class structure before you've actually tried to solve the problem, there is a 100% chance that you will pick the wrong design, and shoot yourself in the foot.
Short answer: No.
Longer answer: No, not at all. There's a reason it hasn't been updated.
[EDIT] # MrBrutal - Sorry - do you mean to generate code or just represent a design? Because I took your question as to generate code for you.
I guess this is old, but I use it a lot. It could definitely be improved, but I find it extremely useful to be able to visualize my class structure, and to be able to jump to a specific class or method by clicking on it visually.
It's also slightly easier to add classes/interfaces with than the solution explorer, although the new files always end up in the root folder, instead of the same folder as the CD.
The main benefit I find is to be able to see a group of closely related classes at once. I think the best approach might be to have a single CD for each code folder/namespace.
I've used it a couple of times to get some decent looking class diagrams to put in presentations/blogposts etc. But thats about it...
Any suggestions on other simple UML/class diagram tools that is easy to use and create some nice looking diagrams? Must be able to generate diagrams from .NET code.
I have tried it out couple of times, mainly for viewing existing classes.
If it would show all the relationships, it would be more usefull. Now it only shows inheritation.
I find it useful sometimes, more often for documentation afterwards.
It's a new little utility, but I don't think you get the full functionality in VS Pro - I think you need Architect's Edition.
The comments here suggest that few people find the class designer useful.
Amusing to note that Microsoft designed the class designer to be a useful replacement to useless UML (UML diagrams being untrustworthy once they lose synchronisation with source code).
The trouble with class diagrams is that they tell us what we already know.
I only use the class designer to display my existing classes, but I don't use it the other way, e.g., design your classes there then let it generate the code.