Skip to main content

[Code refactoring] From Method to Property

Looking over a project I found the following code:
public class AzureLocalStorageTraceListener : XmlWriterTraceListener
{
  public AzureLocalStorageTraceListener()
    : base(Path.Combine(AzureLocalStorageTraceListener.GetLogDirectory().Path, "WebService.svclog"))
  {
  }

  public static DirectoryConfiguration GetLogDirectory()
  {
    DirectoryConfiguration directory = new DirectoryConfiguration();
    directory.Container = "wad-tracefiles";
    directory.DirectoryQuotaInMB = 10;
    directory.Path = RoleEnvironment.GetLocalResource("WebService.svclog").RootPath;
    return directory;
  }
}
My attention was attracted by two things. First, was that we had a method called GetLogDirectory that returns the directory configuration for the logs. This method don’t has any custom logic there, only read a configuration from a specific location and retrieves an object populated with specific information. In this case we could have a property called LogDirectoryConfiguration
public class AzureLocalStorageTraceListener : XmlWriterTraceListener
{
  private const string WebServiceConfigurationKey = "WebService.svclog";

  public AzureLocalStorageTraceListener()
    : base(Path.Combine(LogDirectoryConfiguration.Path, WebServiceConfigurationKey))
  {
  }

  private static DirectoryConfiguration LogDirectoryConfiguration
  {
    get
    {
      DirectoryConfiguration directory = new DirectoryConfiguration
      {
        Container = "wad-tracefiles",
        DirectoryQuotaInMB = 10,
        Path = RoleEnvironment.GetLocalResource(WebServiceConfigurationKey).RootPath
      };
      return directory;
    }
  }
}
Next things is that we return a DirectoryConfiguration and we end up using only the path. Well, why we don’t return directly the string path of the directory.
public class AzureLocalStorageTraceListener : XmlWriterTraceListener
{
  private const string WebServiceConfigurationKey = "WebService.svclog";

  public AzureLocalStorageTraceListener()
    : base(Path.Combine(LogDirectoryPath, WebServiceConfigurationKey))
  {
  }

  private static string LogDirectoryPath
  {
    get
    {
      DirectoryConfiguration directory = new DirectoryConfiguration
      {
        Container = "wad-tracefiles",
        DirectoryQuotaInMB = 10,
        Path = RoleEnvironment.GetLocalResource(WebServiceConfigurationKey).RootPath
      };
      return directory.Path;
    }
  }
}
Now, if we log in our new property will notify that even if we create a directory configuration, we only use the path from it, which is read from configuration. Because of this we don’t need to create an instance of DirectoryConfiguration, we can return directly the RootPath.
public class AzureLocalStorageTraceListener : XmlWriterTraceListener
{
  private const string WebServiceConfigurationKey = "WebService.svclog";

  public AzureLocalStorageTraceListener()
    : base(Path.Combine(LogDirectoryPath, WebServiceConfigurationKey))
  {
  }

  private static string LogDirectoryPath
  {
    get
    {
      return RoleEnvironment.GetLocalResource(WebServiceConfigurationKey).RootPath      
    }
  }
}
Now, we could even delete the property and make directly the call from the constructor, but personally I prefer to keep the call in a separate place. I easier to read (personal opinion).

Comments

  1. Next refactoring :) - if the property is accessed only from within it's own class, why keep it public?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Tudor. This is happening when you rewrite the sample code in Notepad++. I wanted to write private, I already made the update.

      Delete
  2. The important thing here is what GetLocalResource does. If it is an expensive (or potentially expensive) operation, exposing it like a property is not a great idea.

    When I read a property, I don't expect it to have any performance impact. I also don't expect it to throw an exception.

    If there is some resource access (reading from the DB, file system, calculating something expensive) then I would choose to expose it as GetSomething().

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 100% True. I didn't thought about properties from this perspective. :-)

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How to check in AngularJS if a service was register or not

There are cases when you need to check in a service or a controller was register in AngularJS.
For example a valid use case is when you have the same implementation running on multiple application. In this case, you may want to intercept the HTTP provider and add a custom step there. This step don’t needs to run on all the application, only in the one where the service exist and register.
A solution for this case would be to have a flag in the configuration that specify this. In the core you would have an IF that would check the value of this flag.
Another solution is to check if a specific service was register in AngularJS or not. If the service was register that you would execute your own logic.
To check if a service was register or not in AngularJS container you need to call the ‘has’ method of ‘inhector’. It will return TRUE if the service was register.
if ($injector.has('httpInterceptorService')) { $httpProvider.interceptors.push('httpInterceptorService&#…

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 4.51EF 6.0.2VS2013
It seems that there …

Entity Framework (EF) TransactionScope vs Database.BeginTransaction

In today blog post we will talk a little about a new feature that is available on EF6+ related to Transactions.
Until now, when we had to use transaction we used ‘TransactionScope’. It works great and I would say that is something that is now in our blood.
using (var scope = new TransactionScope(TransactionScopeOption.Required)) { using (SqlConnection conn = new SqlConnection("...")) { conn.Open(); SqlCommand sqlCommand = new SqlCommand(); sqlCommand.Connection = conn; sqlCommand.CommandText = ... sqlCommand.ExecuteNonQuery(); ... } scope.Complete(); } Starting with EF6.0 we have a new way to work with transactions. The new approach is based on Database.BeginTransaction(), Database.Rollback(), Database.Commit(). Yes, no more TransactionScope.
In the followi…