Skip to main content

#IF DEBUG can be replaces with Conditional attribute

Pe un proiect legacy la care am lucrat anul acesta apareau destul de conditia urmatoare:
#if DEBUG
     //Some code
#endif
Natura proiectului ne obliga sa avem astfel de cod. Problema era ca uneori noi compilam proiectul configurat pentru RELEASE, faceam modificari la cod si in RELEASE totul parea in ordine, dar pe masina de build, aveam erori de compilare, deoarece acesta compila in DEBUG.
Am descoperit zilele acestea un nou atribut care poate sa inlocuiasca aceasta conditie urata.
[Conditional("DEBUG")]
public static void DoSomething()
{
     //Some code
}
Metoda DoSomething o sa fie apelata doar in cazul proiectul este compilat in DEBUG mode.
Cand putem sa folosim aceast atribut?
  • se poate folosi doar in interiorul unei clase sau a unei structuri. Nu incercati sa il puneti pe metoda unei interfete, deoarece o sa dea eroare la compilare
  • metoda pe care o decorati cu acest atribut nu trebuie sa fie neaparat statica, dar nu are voie sa fie implementarea  unei metode din interfata
  • metoda nu trebuie sa fie marcata cu override, dar poate sa contina atributul virtual
  • valoarea returnata de aceasta metoda trebuie obligatoriu sa fie void
Singurul lucru care poate sa  fie confusing este urmatorul cod:
public class Car
{
     public Car()
     {
          DoSomething();
     }     
     [Conditional("DEBUG")]
     public void DoSomething()
    {
          //Some code.
    }    
}
Ce o sa se intample la compilare daca avem setat RELEASE? O sa avem o eroare de compilare? Se va mai apela  metoda noastra? Raspunsul este ca codul general de IL nu va include si apelul la metoda DoSomething() daca compilam pentru RELEASE.
Personal incerc sa evit sa folosesc aceste conditii, nu sunt foarte sanatoase. Dar daca lucram deja pe un proiect care contine conditii de tip #if DEBUG, pentru a refactoriza codul si a scapa de aceste conditii, primul pas este sa le scoatem ca si metode separate, decorate cu atributul Conditional.

Comments

  1. Fain - asa e implementat si Debug.Assert, de ex..

    De conditional compilation in general nu prea ai cum sa scapi cand codul contine metode proprii de logging sau profiling care trebuie sa se execute doar la debug, nu si in release..

    ReplyDelete
  2. Drept. Dar macar le putem tine frumos grupate. Urasc sa dau de cod care contine atat logica cat si tot felu de conditii de compilare.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Adevarul e ca in C#, care nu are un preprocessor adevarat precum C++, genul asta de directive e mult mai rar folosit..

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to audit an Azure Cosmos DB

In this post, we will talk about how we can audit an Azure Cosmos DB database. Before jumping into the problem let us define the business requirement: As an Administrator I want to be able to audit all changes that were done to specific collection inside my Azure Cosmos DB. The requirement is simple, but can be a little tricky to implement fully. First of all when you are using Azure Cosmos DB or any other storage solution there are 99% odds that you’ll have more than one system that writes data to it. This means that you have or not have control on the systems that are doing any create/update/delete operations. Solution 1: Diagnostic Logs Cosmos DB allows us activate diagnostics logs and stream the output a storage account for achieving to other systems like Event Hub or Log Analytics. This would allow us to have information related to who, when, what, response code and how the access operation to our Cosmos DB was done. Beside this there is a field that specifies what was th...

Can User Technical Profile Influence AI Architecture Decisions?

In the last few days, I ran a small experiment on Devin/Windsurf/Cascade, BMAD, and LLM-based architecture decisions. The initial concern was simple: if an AI coding assistant knows something about the user, for example, that the user is a Java developer or a .NET developer, can this information influence the architecture and technology stack that the AI will propose? This question is important because many companies are starting to use AI tools not only for coding but also for product discovery, architecture, documentation, and technical decision-making. If the AI is influenced by the developer's personal profile, the result may not be fully neutral. It may look like a business or architecture decision, but in reality, it may be partially shaped by the context of the person using the tool. The test was done using BMAD with Devin/Windsurf/Cascade. The scenario was a unified field service operations platform. The task was to let BMAD refine the product, define the architecture and s...

ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded

Today blog post will be started with the following error when running DB tests on the CI machine: threw exception: System.InvalidOperationException: The Entity Framework provider type 'System.Data.Entity.SqlServer.SqlProviderServices, EntityFramework.SqlServer' registered in the application config file for the ADO.NET provider with invariant name 'System.Data.SqlClient' could not be loaded. Make sure that the assembly-qualified name is used and that the assembly is available to the running application. See http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=260882 for more information. at System.Data.Entity.Infrastructure.DependencyResolution.ProviderServicesFactory.GetInstance(String providerTypeName, String providerInvariantName) This error happened only on the Continuous Integration machine. On the devs machines, everything has fine. The classic problem – on my machine it’s working. The CI has the following configuration: TeamCity .NET 4.51 EF 6.0.2 VS2013 It see...