Refactor SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer to use KnownSymbols and add CodeFix #296
Conversation
Rewriten to be of the format: - If this is a well known symbol - and it doesn't accept a MockBehavior - but there's an overload that does: diagnostic - Otherwise, if there's a parameter with the Default behavior: diagnostic
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThis pull request introduces significant enhancements to the Moq.Analyzers project, focusing on improving code analysis and code fix capabilities. The changes primarily involve creating new extension methods, refactoring existing analyzers, and introducing more robust diagnostic and code fix mechanisms. The modifications span multiple files across the project, introducing new classes for symbol and operation extensions, diagnostic edit properties, and code fix providers. Changes
Suggested labels
Suggested reviewers
Possibly related PRs
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![codeclimate[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/9403?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 12
🔭 Outside diff range comments (5)
src/Common/InvocationExpressionSyntaxExtensions.cs (2)
Line range hint
13-15: Add bounds check for ArgumentList accessThe method accesses
Arguments[0]without checking if the ArgumentList contains any arguments.Consider this safer implementation:
internal static InvocationExpressionSyntax? FindMockedMethodInvocationFromSetupMethod(this InvocationExpressionSyntax? setupInvocation) { - LambdaExpressionSyntax? setupLambdaArgument = setupInvocation?.ArgumentList.Arguments[0].Expression as LambdaExpressionSyntax; + if (setupInvocation?.ArgumentList?.Arguments.Count == 0) + { + return null; + } + + LambdaExpressionSyntax? setupLambdaArgument = setupInvocation?.ArgumentList?.Arguments[0].Expression as LambdaExpressionSyntax; return setupLambdaArgument?.Body as InvocationExpressionSyntax; }
Line range hint
17-21: Add similar bounds check for FindMockedMemberExpressionFromSetupMethodThis method has the same array access issue as the previous method.
Apply similar fix:
internal static ExpressionSyntax? FindMockedMemberExpressionFromSetupMethod(this InvocationExpressionSyntax? setupInvocation) { - LambdaExpressionSyntax? setupLambdaArgument = setupInvocation?.ArgumentList.Arguments[0].Expression as LambdaExpressionSyntax; + if (setupInvocation?.ArgumentList?.Arguments.Count == 0) + { + return null; + } + + LambdaExpressionSyntax? setupLambdaArgument = setupInvocation?.ArgumentList?.Arguments[0].Expression as LambdaExpressionSyntax; return setupLambdaArgument?.Body as ExpressionSyntax; }src/CodeFixes/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodFixer.cs (3)
Line range hint
65-69: Add null check and error handling for callbackInvocationThe current implementation assumes the parent chain will be valid, which might not always be true.
Add proper null checking and error handling:
- if (oldParameters?.Parent?.Parent?.Parent?.Parent is not InvocationExpressionSyntax callbackInvocation) + if (oldParameters is null) + { + return document; + } + + var parent = oldParameters.Parent?.Parent?.Parent?.Parent; + if (parent is not InvocationExpressionSyntax callbackInvocation)
Line range hint
71-72: Replace Debug.Assert with runtime checkUsing Debug.Assert is not suitable for production code as it's stripped in release builds.
Replace with runtime validation:
- Debug.Assert(setupMethodInvocation != null, nameof(setupMethodInvocation) + " != null"); + if (setupMethodInvocation is null) + { + return document; + }
Line range hint
74-77: Add error handling for empty matchingMockedMethodsThe code assumes there will always be exactly one matching method, but should handle the empty case explicitly.
Add explicit handling:
- if (matchingMockedMethods.Length != 1) + if (matchingMockedMethods.Length == 0) + { + // Log or handle the case where no matching methods were found + return document; + } + + if (matchingMockedMethods.Length > 1) + { + // Log or handle the case where multiple matching methods were found + return document; + }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (14)
src/Analyzers/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer.cs(1 hunks)src/CodeFixes/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodFixer.cs(1 hunks)src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/CodeFixes/SetExplicitMockBehaviorFixer.cs(1 hunks)src/CodeFixes/SyntaxGeneratorExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/IMethodSymbolExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/IOperationExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs(3 hunks)src/Common/InvocationExpressionSyntaxExtensions.cs(1 hunks)tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodCodeFixTests.cs(1 hunks)tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzerTests.cs(0 hunks)tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/SetExplicitMockBehaviorCodeFixTests.cs(1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzerTests.cs
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (13)
src/Common/InvocationExpressionSyntaxExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/IOperationExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/CodeFixes/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodFixer.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/SetExplicitMockBehaviorCodeFixTests.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodCodeFixTests.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Analyzers/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/CodeFixes/SyntaxGeneratorExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/IMethodSymbolExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/CodeFixes/SetExplicitMockBehaviorFixer.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
🪛 GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest)
src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs
[failure] 29-29:
Use an overload of 'TryParse' that has a 'System.IFormatProvider' parameter (https://github.com/meziantou/Meziantou.Analyzer/blob/main/docs/Rules/MA0011.md)
[failure] 29-29:
Use an overload of 'TryParse' that has a 'System.IFormatProvider' parameter (https://github.com/meziantou/Meziantou.Analyzer/blob/main/docs/Rules/MA0011.md)
🔇 Additional comments (6)
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs (1)
10-11: LGTM: Optimized lambda allocation
Good use of the static lambda to avoid unnecessary allocations.
src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs (4)
30-32: LGTM! Correct handling of method symbol comparison.
The comparison of method symbols using OriginalDefinition properly handles generic method specializations.
63-79: 🧹 Nitpick (assertive)
Consider performance optimization for large symbol arrays.
While the implementation is correct, consider using LINQ's FirstOrDefault for a more concise and potentially more efficient implementation when dealing with large arrays.
-foreach (TSymbol other in others)
-{
- if (symbol.IsInstanceOf(other, symbolEqualityComparer))
- {
- matchingSymbol = other;
- return true;
- }
-}
-
-matchingSymbol = null;
-return false;
+matchingSymbol = others.FirstOrDefault(other => symbol.IsInstanceOf(other, symbolEqualityComparer));
+return matchingSymbol != null;Likely invalid or redundant comment.
35-39: Verify handling of optional parameters.
While the current implementation correctly checks ordinal position and type, we should verify the behavior with optional parameters.
41-48: Verify handling of nested generic types.
The implementation handles basic generic types correctly, but we should verify behavior with nested generic types.
✅ Verification successful
Implementation correctly handles nested generic types
The current implementation of IsInstanceOf for INamedTypeSymbol is correct and safe for nested generic types because:
- It uses
ConstructedFromwhich is the Roslyn-provided way to get the original definition of a generic type, regardless of nesting depth - The comparison is done using
SymbolEqualityComparerwhich is designed to handle all symbol comparisons correctly, including nested generic types - The implementation delegates the actual type comparison to Roslyn's built-in symbol comparison infrastructure
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for nested generic type declarations
ast-grep --pattern 'class $_ {
$$$
$_<$_<$_>>
$$$
}'
Length of output: 60
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a different approach to find nested generic type usage
# First, let's see the full implementation of IsInstanceOf
rg -U "IsInstanceOf.*\{" -A 20
# Also search for test files that might contain nested generic type scenarios
fd "Test.*\.cs$" --exec rg -l "IsInstanceOf"
Length of output: 5344
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look at the complete implementation of IsInstanceOf method that handles INamedTypeSymbol
rg -U "public static bool IsInstanceOf.*\{" -B 5 -A 15 src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs
# Also search for any usages of IsInstanceOf with generic types in the codebase
rg "IsInstanceOf.*<.*>" -A 2
Length of output: 1346
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's see the complete implementation of the IsInstanceOf method
rg -U "IsInstanceOf.*\{" -B 2 -A 50 src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs
# Also look for any test cases that might verify the behavior
fd ".*Tests\.cs$" --exec rg -l "IsInstanceOf"
Length of output: 3133
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's look at the primary IsInstanceOf method implementation that handles INamedTypeSymbol
rg -U "public static bool IsInstanceOf.*where TSymbol : class, ISymbol" -B 2 -A 20 src/Common/ISymbolExtensions.cs
# Also search for any usages with nested generic types in the codebase
rg "IsInstanceOf.*<.*<.*>>" -A 2
Length of output: 151
tests/Moq.Analyzers.Test/CallbackSignatureShouldMatchMockedMethodCodeFixTests.cs (1)
1-1: LGTM! Comprehensive test coverage.
The test cases thoroughly cover various callback scenarios including:
- Different parameter types
- Generic type conversions
- Nullable references
- Custom type conversions
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
♻️ Duplicate comments (1)
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (1)
24-33:⚠️ Potential issueAdd validation for EditPosition property
The
EditPositionproperty lacks validation to ensure it's non-negative. This could lead to runtime errors.Since this is a record class, implement validation in the primary constructor:
+ public DiagnosticEditProperties(EditType typeOfEdit, int editPosition) + { + if (editPosition < 0) + throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(nameof(editPosition), "Position cannot be negative"); + + TypeOfEdit = typeOfEdit; + EditPosition = editPosition; + }
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (2)
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
🪛 GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest)
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
🪛 GitHub Check: build (windows-latest)
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
🔇 Additional comments (4)
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (1)
11-22: LGTM: Well-documented enum with clear purpose
The EditType enum is well-documented and its values clearly represent distinct operations.
src/Common/EnumerableExtensions.cs (3)
8-9: LGTM: Performance optimization with static lambda
Good use of static lambda to avoid unnecessary allocations.
11-15: LGTM: Consistent implementation with IEnumerable overload
The implementation follows the same pattern as the IEnumerable overload, maintaining consistency.
17-22:
Avoid boxing with ImmutableArray
The use of AsEnumerable() causes unnecessary boxing for value types due to interface dispatch. This is flagged by static analysis.
Implement the logic directly to avoid boxing:
public static TSource? DefaultIfNotSingle<TSource>(this ImmutableArray<TSource> source, Func<TSource, bool> predicate)
{
- return source.AsEnumerable().DefaultIfNotSingle(predicate);
+ bool isFound = false;
+ TSource? item = default;
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < source.Length; i++)
+ {
+ if (!predicate(source[i]))
+ continue;
+
+ if (isFound)
+ return default;
+
+ isFound = true;
+ item = source[i];
+ }
+
+ return item;
}Likely invalid or redundant comment.
🧰 Tools
🪛 GitHub Check: build (ubuntu-latest)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
🪛 GitHub Check: build (windows-latest)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
[failure] 22-22:
Consider using an alternative implementation to avoid boxing and unboxing (https://github.com/rjmurillo/EffectiveCSharp.Analyzers/blob/2e09b6784ae3cb47e1a313dfd34379bef7c3078e/docs/rules/ECS0900.md)
MattKotsenas
force-pushed
the
feature/mockbehavior-codefix
branch
from
fb05939 to
d7c103c
Compare
|
Code Climate has analyzed commit d7c103c and detected 20 issues on this pull request. Here's the issue category breakdown:
View more on Code Climate. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 4
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Pro
📒 Files selected for processing (4)
src/Analyzers/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer.cs(2 hunks)src/Analyzers/SquiggleCop.Baseline.yaml(1 hunks)src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs(1 hunks)src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs(1 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
📓 Path-based instructions (3)
src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
src/Analyzers/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer.cs (1)
Pattern **/*.cs: I need your help tracking down and fixing some bugs that have been reported in this codebase.
I suspect the bugs are related to:
- Incorrect handling of edge cases
- Off-by-one errors in loops or array indexing
- Unexpected data types
- Uncaught exceptions
- Concurrency issues
- Improper configuration settings
To diagnose:
- Review the code carefully and systematically
- Trace the relevant code paths
- Consider boundary conditions and potential error states
- Look for antipatterns that tend to cause bugs
- Run the code mentally with example inputs
- Think about interactions between components
When you find potential bugs, for each one provide:
- File path and line number(s)
- Description of the issue and why it's a bug
- Example input that would trigger the bug
- Suggestions for how to fix it
After analysis, please update the code with your proposed fixes. Try to match the existing code style. Add regression tests if possible to prevent the bugs from recurring.
I appreciate your diligence and attention to detail! Let me know if you need any clarification on the intended behavior of the code.
🔇 Additional comments (27)
src/Common/DiagnosticEditProperties.cs (2)
8-9: Consider making static fields constants instead of using nameof(EditTypeKey) and nameof(EditPositionKey).
They’re used solely as dictionary keys, so meaningful constant strings (e.g., "EditType", "EditPosition") would be clearer and avoid any confusion about circular references.
35-35: Validate negative positions for EditPosition.
If a negative EditPosition is unintended, it can lead to off-by-one or unforeseen indexing errors. Add a validation or throw an exception to avoid such edge cases.
src/CodeFixes/CodeFixContextExtensions.cs (1)
10-10: Check if context.Diagnostics is empty before accessing context.Diagnostics[0].
Directly accessing context.Diagnostics[0] can throw IndexOutOfRangeException if there are no diagnostics. Add a bounds check to ensure a safer implementation.
public static bool TryGetEditProperties(this CodeFixContext context, [NotNullWhen(true)] out DiagnosticEditProperties? editProperties)
{
+ if (context.Diagnostics.Length == 0)
+ {
+ editProperties = null;
+ return false;
+ }
ImmutableDictionary<string, string?> properties = context.Diagnostics[0].Properties;
return DiagnosticEditProperties.TryGetFromImmutableDictionary(properties, out editProperties);
}src/Analyzers/SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzer.cs (23)
1-2: No issues found with the new using directives.
They correctly reference necessary namespaces for the analyzer.
54-54: Balanced approach to object creation vs. invocation analysis.
You are correctly handling both object creation and invocation. No issues identified.
57-59: Robust check for IObjectCreationOperation.
This validates the operation kind gracefully, preventing null references.
73-73: Delegated analysis call looks good.
AnalyzeCore is kept separate, preserving modular design and readability.
76-78: Robust check for IInvocationOperation.
Similar to AnalyzeObjectCreation, it ensures the operation kind is correct. No issues found.
83-87: Selective scoping for recognized methods.
The code warns about potential expansions. It's a good practice to keep the analysis targeted to avoid false positives.
90-90: Invocation analysis delegated to AnalyzeCore.
Keeps the approach consistent with object creation analysis.
94-94: Centralizing logic in AnalyzeCore.
This is a good design approach, ensuring consistent checks for both invocation and object creation.
99-100: Graceful fallback to overload with a MockBehavior parameter.
This logic is valuable for guiding the user towards the correct method signature, rather than ignoring the missing parameter.
102-104: Return early if the overload unexpectedly lacks the parameter.
This prevents false positives and ensures consistent flow.
107-111: DiagnosticEditProperties insertion logic.
Properties are built here to guide the eventual code fix, with a clearly documented rationale. Looks good.
113-114: Diagnostic reported for no MockBehavior parameter.
This warns users about missing parameter usage or the availability of a better overload.
118-119: Locates the argument specifically for the mockBehavior parameter.
The approach is consistent with the extension method usage.
120-122: Detecting default value usage.
The comment clarifies the challenge of distinguishing Loose vs. Default. The fallback logic is sensible.
123-126: Defensive check for parameter retrieval.
Prevents null references or unexpected states.
128-133: Similar property building for Insert edit.
Consistent approach to building the DiagnosticEditProperties for code fix insertion.
134-134: Code fix diagnostic is reported.
No issues.
143-143: Parameter lookup repeated.
No problem found. It's consistent with prior usage.
145-145: Return if param match is not found.
No issues.
148-152: DiagnosticEditProperties for Replace edit.
This is used correctly to help users transition from Default to an explicit mock behavior.
154-155: Reporting the final diagnostic for the Replace scenario.
Concludes the logic properly. No issues.
52-52: Check for potential performance overhead from registering two operation actions.
While this is likely fine, ensure that each registered action does not run excessive logic.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the results, I can now generate the final response as I have enough information about the implementation of both analysis methods.
No performance concerns found in the registered operation actions
Both AnalyzeObjectCreation and AnalyzeInvocation methods contain early returns and simple type checks. The logic is straightforward and efficient:
AnalyzeObjectCreationperforms basic null checks and type instance verificationAnalyzeInvocationhas minimal logic with early returns and a narrowly scoped check, as explicitly noted in the comments
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# This script looks for usage of "AnalyzeObjectCreation" and "AnalyzeInvocation"
# to verify that no heavy operations are performed in a tight loop.
rg "AnalyzeObjectCreation|AnalyzeInvocation" -A 10
Length of output: 3960
96-97: Ensure correct identification of the MockBehavior parameter.
No immediate issues, but watch for edge cases with types that implement or wrap MockBehavior differently.
✅ Verification successful
Based on the search results, I can see that the MockBehavior parameter is well-handled across the codebase. The test cases cover various scenarios including:
- Different
MockBehaviorvalues (Loose, Strict, Default) - Different mock creation patterns (constructor, Mock.Of, MockRepository)
- Edge cases with different parameter combinations
- Both explicit and implicit behavior specifications
The analyzer correctly identifies the MockBehavior parameter through IsInstanceOf(knownSymbols.MockBehavior) check, which is consistent with how the parameter is used throughout the codebase. The test coverage demonstrates that the parameter identification is working as expected.
No edge cases or wrapper types around MockBehavior were found in the codebase.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Check for any wrapper or extension usage around MockBehavior to ensure coverage
rg "MockBehavior" -A 15
Length of output: 66588
src/Analyzers/SquiggleCop.Baseline.yaml (1)
362-362: IDE0005 rule enabled by default.
Previously, it may have been disabled. Enabling it can help remove unnecessary using directives, but verify that spurious warnings do not hamper code readability.
✅ Verification successful
IDE0005 rule configuration is consistent across the codebase
The rule is enabled by default (IsEnabledByDefault: true) in all configuration files, but it's explicitly suppressed (IsEverSuppressed: true) in production code paths (src/) while being active in test paths. This is an intentional configuration to maintain different standards for production and test code.
src/Analyzers/SquiggleCop.Baseline.yaml: Suppressedsrc/CodeFixes/SquiggleCop.Baseline.yaml: Suppressedtests/*/SquiggleCop.Baseline.yaml: Not suppressed
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Searching for IDE0005 suppression or references
rg "IDE0005" -A 5
Length of output: 7640
|
I admit this is bigger than I'd like for a single change. If it's too big to review effectively, let me know and I'll try to break it up. |
Introduced a new rule Moq1410, to enforce setting the MockBehavior to Strict in Mock declarations. This is set as Info and can be elevated in `.editorconfig`. Fixes #127 Related to #296 from @MattKotsenas (Thanks Matt!) Changes: - Introduced a new abstract class for analyzing `MockBehavior` so code can be shared between Matt's implementation and this. - Added a new diagnostic analyzer (`Moq1410`) to enforce explicit strict mocking behavior. - Introduced a code fix provider for handling diagnostics related to strict mock behavior. - Enhanced encapsulation by changing public members to internal in the `MoqKnownSymbols` class.
This PR accomplishes two goals:
SetExplicitMockBehaviorAnalyzerto useKnownSymbolsto simplify the analyzer and use theIOperation-based analysis