25.06.2013, 12:11 | #1 |
Участник
|
mfp: Debug::Assert in X++
Источник: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mfp/archive/...sert-in-x.aspx
============== “In computer programming, an assertion is a predicate (a true–false statement) placed in a program to indicate that the developer thinks that the predicate is always true at that place.” What would you rather have: A piece of source code with or without assertions? I’d definitely prefer source code with assertions – it makes the code easier to read, debug and troubleshoot. My recommendation is to use assertions in X++ when all of the following are true:
1. The condition can never be false if the code is correct Assertions and error handling are two different things.
2. The condition is not so trivial it obviously be always true Assert statements takes time to write and read – and if the condition they are asserting is obviously always true, then the assertion is pure clutter – and we are better off without it. 3. The condition is in some sense internal to the component A failing assertion is an indication of a problem with the implementation. Something within the component – regardless of input from the outside world – is broken and needs fixing. Typically, I’d use assertions for input validation in private methods, and exceptions in public methods. Conversely, you don’t want consumers of your component to be hit by assertions – regardless of how they use your component. 4. The condition can be verified without any method calls. Assert statements in X++ are a little special, as the X++ compiler always includes assert statements. In other languages (like C#) you can have multiple compiler targets – and typically the release build would not include the assert statements. Given assert statements in X++ are always evaluated, and thus degrades performance, they should be used with a bit of caution. If the condition can be verified with minimal overhead – for example that a variable has a certain value – then there is no problem. However; if the assertion requires execution of complex logic, RPC or SQL calls then it should be avoided, due to the performance impact. In cases where the performance impact is significant, but you don’t want to compromise on assertions, the assertions can be wrapped inside a call to Debug::debugMode(). “without any method calls” is just a guiding principles. Sometimes it makes sense to factor the condition into a Boolean method – for reuse or for clarity – here I would not object. Examples Here is an example of good use of assertion in X++: private void markDetailRecordAsEdited( RecId _journalControlDetailId, RecId _draftConstraintTreeId){ Debug::assert(_journalControlDetailId != 0); Debug::assert(_draftConstraintTreeId != 0); if (! modifiedDetailRecords.exists(_journalControlDetailId)) { modifiedDetailRecords.insert( _journalControlDetailId, _draftConstraintTreeId); }} Here is another example where Debug::debugMode() is used: private void render(){ ... if (Debug::debugMode()) { Debug::assert(this.hierarchyCount() > 0); Debug::assert(segments != null); Debug::assert(totalSegmentCount > 0); } ...}Closing remarks I once saw a t-shirt with this print on the front: “If debugging is the process of removing bugs, then programming must be the process of putting them in”. I wish the back had read: “Programming with assertions is one way to keep bugs out.” ============== Источник: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/mfp/archive/...sert-in-x.aspx
__________________
Расскажите о новых и интересных блогах по Microsoft Dynamics, напишите личное сообщение администратору. |
|
27.06.2013, 11:46 | #2 |
Участник
|
Радует, что товарищ снова стал делиться опытом. О разных конференциях и релизах и так все пишут.
|
|
02.07.2014, 22:21 | #3 |
Administrator
|
Уважаемый mfp умалчивает об одном важном отличии Debug::assert() от throw error(). В случае, если условие в Debug::assert() не выполняется, программа продолжает работать дальше. То есть, пользователи видят ошибку, если есть дебаггер, то он запускается, но при этом выполнение кода продолжается как ни в чём не бывало.
Не самая приятная особенность, если честно. Ведь в большинстве случаев assert() появляется не просто так, а для обозначения того, что нижеследующий код при невыполнении некоторых условий может работать некорректно. Логично было бы в такой ситуации код не выполнять, по-моему.
__________________
Not registered yet? Register here! Have comments, questions, suggestions or anything else regarding our web site? Don't hesitate, send them to me |
|
03.07.2014, 07:48 | #4 |
Участник
|
Цитата:
Ловить тикие ошибки - удовольствие то еще....
__________________
AxAssist 2012 - Productivity Tool for Dynamics AX 2012/2009/4.0/3.0 Последний раз редактировалось Alex_KD; 03.07.2014 в 07:59. |
|
03.07.2014, 10:13 | #5 |
Участник
|
кстати поддержка MBS вообще вызов Debug::assert() за ошибку не считает. рекомендация от них собственно заключается в отключении отладчика у пользователя в таких случаях. вообще конечно непонятная конструкция в нынешнем исполнении
|
|
03.07.2014, 10:50 | #6 |
Administrator
|
Если Debug::assert() вызвать в CIL, то выполнение не останавливается (хотя Enable global breakpoints у меня не активировано; возможно, дело в этом). В Infolog вываливается ошибка, но выполнение продолжается со следующей строчки.
__________________
Not registered yet? Register here! Have comments, questions, suggestions or anything else regarding our web site? Don't hesitate, send them to me |
|
|
|