Skip to content
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

Omnisharp VS Code Issue 1814 Fix #1007

Merged
merged 15 commits into from
Nov 9, 2017
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 5 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension


Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions package-lock.json

Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,13 +1,17 @@
using System.Collections.Generic;
using Microsoft.CodeAnalysis;
using Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Syntax;


namespace OmniSharp.Roslyn.CSharp.Services.Signatures
{
internal class InvocationContext
{
public SemanticModel SemanticModel { get; set; }
public int Position { get; set; }
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not your fault, but do these properties actually need to be mutable? Can we have them be get-only?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes , it works with get-only.

public SyntaxNode Receiver { get; set; }
public ArgumentListSyntax ArgumentList { get; set; }
}
public IEnumerable<TypeInfo> ArgumentTypes { get; set; }
public IEnumerable<SyntaxToken> Separators { get; set; }
}
}

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Blank line

Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ public async Task<SignatureHelpResponse> Handle(SignatureHelpRequest request)
var response = new SignatureHelpResponse();

// define active parameter by position
foreach (var comma in invocations.First().ArgumentList.Arguments.GetSeparators())
foreach (var comma in invocations.First().Separators)
{
if (comma.Span.Start > invocations.First().Position)
{
Expand All @@ -58,9 +58,7 @@ public async Task<SignatureHelpResponse> Handle(SignatureHelpRequest request)

foreach (var invocation in invocations)
{
var types = invocation.ArgumentList.Arguments
.Select(argument => invocation.SemanticModel.GetTypeInfo(argument.Expression));

var types = invocation.ArgumentTypes;
foreach (var methodOverload in GetMethodOverloads(invocation.SemanticModel, invocation.Receiver))
{
var signature = BuildSignature(methodOverload);
Expand All @@ -74,7 +72,6 @@ public async Task<SignatureHelpResponse> Handle(SignatureHelpRequest request)
}
}
}

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Leave this blank line here (the brace is followed by a statement).

var signaturesList = signaturesSet.ToList();
response.Signatures = signaturesList;
response.ActiveSignature = signaturesList.IndexOf(bestScoredItem);
Expand All @@ -96,27 +93,42 @@ private async Task<InvocationContext> GetInvocation(Document document, Request r
var invocation = node as InvocationExpressionSyntax;
if (invocation != null && invocation.ArgumentList.Span.Contains(position))
{
var semanticModel = await document.GetSemanticModelAsync();
return new InvocationContext()
{
SemanticModel = await document.GetSemanticModelAsync(),
SemanticModel = semanticModel,
Position = position,
Receiver = invocation.Expression,
ArgumentList = invocation.ArgumentList
ArgumentTypes = invocation.ArgumentList.Arguments.Select(argument => semanticModel.GetTypeInfo(argument.Expression)),
Separators = invocation.ArgumentList.Arguments.GetSeparators()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

same comment as above

};
}

var objectCreation = node as ObjectCreationExpressionSyntax;
if (objectCreation != null && objectCreation.ArgumentList.Span.Contains(position))
{
var semanticModel = await document.GetSemanticModelAsync();
return new InvocationContext()
{
SemanticModel = await document.GetSemanticModelAsync(),
SemanticModel = semanticModel,
Position = position,
Receiver = objectCreation,
ArgumentList = objectCreation.ArgumentList
ArgumentTypes = objectCreation.ArgumentList.Arguments.Select(argument => semanticModel.GetTypeInfo(argument.Expression)),
Separators = objectCreation.ArgumentList.Arguments.GetSeparators()
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

and here

};
}
var attributeSyntax = node as AttributeSyntax;
if (attributeSyntax != null && attributeSyntax.ArgumentList.Span.Contains(position))
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can make this a little cleaner by using a pattern match expression:
if (node is AttributeSyntax attributeSyntax && attributeSyntax ... )

{
var semanticModel = await document.GetSemanticModelAsync();
return new InvocationContext()
{
SemanticModel = semanticModel,
Position = position,
Receiver = attributeSyntax,
ArgumentTypes = attributeSyntax.ArgumentList.Arguments.Select(argument => semanticModel.GetTypeInfo(argument.Expression)),
Separators = attributeSyntax.ArgumentList.Arguments.GetSeparators()
};
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same comments as above.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Could you avoid copying and pasting the same code multiple times?


node = node.Parent;
}

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Don't remove this line (the rule is to leave a blank line between a close brace and a statement).

Expand Down
105 changes: 104 additions & 1 deletion tests/OmniSharp.Roslyn.CSharp.Tests/SignatureHelpFacts.cs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -115,7 +115,7 @@ public async Task TestForParameterLabels()
public static void Main(){
Foo($$);
}
pubic static Foo(bool b, int n = 1234)
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lol

public static Foo(bool b, int n = 1234)

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

have we verified that this code was not intentionally invalid previously?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, didn't verify that. Should I revert it back to the previous state ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wouldn't think so. This doesn't look intentional to me based on the test name.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You should look at the test and decide whether the typo was intentional :)

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My guess, based on what's being tested, is that it was unintentional.

{
}
}";
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -152,6 +152,109 @@ private int Foo(int one, int two, int three)
Assert.Equal(0, actual.ActiveParameter);
}

[Fact]
public async Task SignatureHelpforAttCtorSingleParam()
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I would prefer that we not abbreviate "attribute".

{
const string source =
@"using System;
[MyTest($$)]
public class TestClass
{
int value;

public static void Main()
{
var attributes= typeof(TestClass).CustomAttributes;
foreach (var attribute in attributes)
{
Console.WriteLine(attribute);
}
}
void TestMethod(int value)
{
this.value = value;
}
}
public class MyTestAttribute : Attribute
{
int value;
public MyTestAttribute(int value)
{
this.value = value;
}
}";
var actual = await GetSignatureHelp(source);
Assert.Equal(0, actual.ActiveParameter);

var signature = actual.Signatures.ElementAt(0);
Assert.Single(signature.Parameters);
Assert.Equal("value", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(0).Name);
Assert.Equal("int value", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(0).Label);
}
[Fact]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Missing blank line before method. Should be between close brace and [Fact]

public async Task SignatureHelpforAttCtorMultipleParam()
{
const string source =
@"using System;
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this pass? It doesn't look like there's a "$$" anywhere in the markup?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My bad, I see it. Anyway, it seems like the test is called "MultipleParam", but you're only testing in the first parameter position.

[MyTest($$)]
public class TestClass
{
public static void Main()
{
}
}
public class MyTestAttribute : Attribute
{
int value1;
double value2;
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can remove these.

public MyTestAttribute(int value1,double value2)
{
this.value1 = value1;
this.value2 = value2;
}
}
";
var actual = await GetSignatureHelp(source);
Assert.Equal(0, actual.ActiveParameter);

var signature = actual.Signatures.ElementAt(0);
Assert.Equal(2, signature.Parameters.Count());
Assert.Equal("value1", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(0).Name);
Assert.Equal("int value1", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(0).Label);
Assert.Equal("value2", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(1).Name);
Assert.Equal("double value2", signature.Parameters.ElementAt(1).Label);
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

unnecessary blank line

[Fact]
public async Task SignatureHelpforAttCtorNoParam()
{
const string source =
@"using System;
[MyTest($$)]
public class TestClass
{
public static void Main()
{
}
}
public class MyTestAttribute : Attribute
{
int value1;
double value2;
public MyTestAttribute()
{
this.value1 = 1;
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You can delete all the "value1" and "value2" related stuff since this test doesn't use them.

this.value2 = 2;
}
}";
var actual = await GetSignatureHelp(source);
Assert.Single(actual.Signatures);
Assert.Equal(0, actual.ActiveParameter);
Assert.Equal(0, actual.ActiveSignature);
Assert.Equal("MyTestAttribute", actual.Signatures.ElementAt(0).Name);
Assert.Empty(actual.Signatures.ElementAt(0).Parameters);
}

[Fact]
public async Task ActiveParameterIsBasedOnComma2()
{
Expand Down