-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 461
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Audit async/await #851
Comments
this is what i found inside the Big.sln, few async voids too code\src\UI\VisualStudio\SolutionWizard.cs -> RunFinished code\src\UI\ViewModels\NewProject\MainViewModel.cs(166) code\src\UI\ViewModels\Common\BaseMainViewModel.cs(283) code\src\Installer.2017\Commands\RelayCommandPackage.cs(66) code\src\Installer.2017\Commands\GenContextBootstrapService.cs(42) code\test\Templates.Test\StyleCopProjectGenerationTests.cs(69) code\test\Templates.Test\ProjectGenerationTests.cs(150) code\src\Core\Locations\TemplatesSynchronization.cs(206) code\src\Core\Diagnostics\TelemetryTracker.cs(146) code\test\VsEmulator\Main\MainViewModel.cs(179) test\Core.Test\TestData\Merge\Source_expected.cs(93): code\test\Core.Test\TestData\Merge\Source.cs(88) |
You don't need to do this by hand.... Use this: https://www.nuget.org/packages/Microsoft.VisualStudio.Threading.Analyzers Calls these out in the IDE. You can also configure them as either warnings or errors if you want to hard-fail. |
Zomg. I need to chat with you more often! |
@mrlacey how does the analyzers work for the stylecop checks. we should add this in as well there. |
@crutkas Can add that package to the Secret StyleCop template, set warnings as errors and it would be caught as part of the test....i think |
I've added the analyzer to the main projects and fixed the naming issues and a few easy other things. It's also highlighted a bunch of other issues that are more involved and will take longer to fix than I have time in the next week so leaving this open. I tried adding the analyzer to the StyleCop tests but as the Analyzer covers a lot of other things it found a lot of false positives that show this isn't the best way to verify the naming in the generated projects. Have created #969 to track that as a separate issue. |
#851 + a few other miscellaneous warnings
with #1002, this can be closed out, no? |
This is still raising some warnings, but they're complicated to fix.
Could close this and raise another issue to follow up but had left this open and unassigned to address this here. Could close on the basis that the audit has been done but this feels just like moving the work along. |
lets close, log bugs against, and then suppress them |
don't see a reason to keep this open |
After #844, i think we should do a full audit.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: