Suppress Obsolete Warning On Factory Method In .net
Apr 30, 2009
Is it possible to prevent compiler warning caused by a static factory method returning an instance of an obsolete class? For example if an instance of an obsolete class (Foo) is created through a static method (Create) a compiler warning is caused by the factory method.
<Obsolete()> _
Public Class Foo
Public Shared Function Create() As Foo
[code]....
In C# the warning could be suppressed using "#pragma warning..." but I don't think that this exists within VB.Net. Migrating to C# is not an option due to business requirements.
Is it possible to prevent compiler warning caused by a static factory method returning an instance of an obsolete class? For example if an instance of an obsolete class (Foo) is created through a static method (Create) a compiler warning is caused by the factory method.
<Obsolete()> _ Public Class Foo Public Shared Function Create() As Foo
[code]....
In C# the warning could be suppressed using "#pragma warning..." but I don't think that this exists within VB.Net. Migrating to C# is not an option due to business requirements.
I wanted to know how to encrypt data.And I've found a solution at this web site.This script works if I use it as a function.Nonetheless, Visual Studio throws a warning that says the following.[code]Visual Studio underlines the second line after the equal symbol above.I have no idea what that means.Does anybody have any idea how I can resolve this warning?
I have the following Sub Routine in my vb.net project which runs fine, but I constantly get build warnings:
'Public Overridable Sub RegisterClientScriptBlock(key As String, script As String)' is obsolete: 'The recommended alternative is ClientScript.RegisterClientScriptBlock(Type type, string key, string
I'm compiling a VB.Net 2.0 app (created in VS2008) using msbuild, and now I've added a generic return type, it's giving me the following:
Warning: Type library exporter encountered a generic type instance in a signature. Generic code may not be exported to COM.
Having just spent ages removing all of the previous warnings, I don't really want to add a new one. Any idea how to get rid of it (aside from not using generics)?I don't know what details I'd put in the attribute, or what number to put in the project-level ignore list.
I am calling a function in an external dll to a device that runs some firmware. When I call device_open(), the device driver brings up a Warning dialog box that says there is a newer version of the firmware available. How do I suppress the warning dialog box? I am calling this function during an overnight test, so the dialog box prevents my tests from finishing.
Imports System.CodeDom.Compiler Public Class iCompiler Public Shared Sub GenerateExecutable(ByVal Output As String, ByVal Source As String, ByVal Icon As String)[code].....
Public Class airplane Private var_num_seats As Integer Private var_num_engines As Integer
[code]....
Obviously, I don't wish that the class Glider has the method "start_engines" neither the property "num_engines". Otherwise, other child classes may have. How can I supress these property and method in child class, not just ignoring (if I can)?
I have VB.Net code in VS 2008 using an obsolete method, and would like to suppress the warning.Unfortunately, following the recommendation is not a good solution, because it requires using a different class, which works differently, in important ways.I'm trying to suppress the warning using System.Diagnostics.CodeAnalysis.SuppressMessage, but I don't know what to write as the parameters for the attribute, and can't find any relevant reference.
I should also say that, right-clicking on the error in the error list I don't have any 'Suppress Message' option.
Quote: Warning1'Public Property Address() As Long' is obsolete: 'This property has been deprecated. It is address family dependent. Please use IPAddress.Equals method to perform comparisons. http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=14202'E:\_Visual Studio_2008VBPingerclassPingerpingerbib.vb16738pingerbib
with this
Dim ipaddress As IPAddress Dim ip As Integer = CInt(Net.IPAddress.Parse(IP_adresse).Address
I have created a few WebRequest extension methods that support cancelling. Is it possible to mark related .net framework methods as Obsolete. That will allow other developers to get warning and encourage them to use a new extension methods.
I have VB 2008 and am trying to find a multithreading example that won't show up as obsolete. (seems like most examples are releavant for vb 2005) I found an example on the back ground worker. Is this true multi threading?I am working on a project that needs to go out and get data often but still allow the user to interact with the menus and graphics.
I'd like to put the data grabbing on a timer on a seperate thread. how to make a timer and related data grabbing a seperate thread so I don't have "starts/stops" in the gui?
When using: vb System.Net.Dns.GetHostByAddress it states that it is obsolete, and to use GetHostEntry instead. But for some IP's this errors whereas GetHostByAddress does not... for example:
I have upgraded a visual basic 2005 project to visual basic 2010 (.net framework 4.0). I want to list all obsolete functions used in this project in order to change it with newer ones. How can I treat obsolete functions warnings as errors in visual basic 2010 ms-build?
In .NET you can mark certain methods as obsolete so that developers are alerted when they attempt to use the deprecated method.
<Obsolete("Do not call this method.")> Private Sub FormerMethod()
The thing is you can only do this within classes you control. What do you do when you want your developers to avoid using certain methods on classes provided natively in .NET or by a vendor?
For example, what if you want your developer to prefer some custom extension method on DataTable rather than Select. I'd hate to have to define a custom version of the DataTable class if only to deprecate Select. That would leave us having to police whether or not the custom table was being used.
when should a trigger in your head go off signifying "Aha! I should use the factory pattern here!"? I find these moments will occur with many other design patterns, but never do I stop myself and think about this pattern.
I'm using Microsoft.Reporting.Webforms version 10 in order to parse an RDLC file and produce a PDF. The RDLC is a simple invoice with a couple of embedded expressions. When I run the application I get an exception that a call to the obsoleted SecurityAction.RequestMinimum has been made when compiling the expressions. Is this a known bug or something I can remedy?
I have read the MSDN Page on how to suppress messages. I am unable to supress warnings for VS2008. [code] The problem was I had a series of parallel tasks that were dependent on check boxes. I wanted each task to to run simultaneously and then join back. I overcame the warning by using a callback method that decremented until all the call backs completed. [code] The warning was an Uninitialized Variable. Which was not the case as it was dependent on identical if-statements. I opted to use a callback method instead, which turned out to be a better alternative and did not lock up the GUI.
First the requirements: By management requirements, I can't use open source code. I need the users to define their own formulas for a project. My users don't know how to code. The formulas need to be saved somehow, and being read later. I need to debug the formulas written, so I need to be able to see and understand them. The formulas used are quite specialized and specific (actuarial formulas). Adding new formulas (functionality) must be done in fast and maintainable way.
Client(winforms MDI) is generated using svcutil using /l, /r, /ct, & /n switches
Service and client both use a MyEntities.dll
I am using nettcp with TransportWithMessageCredential. I cache the proxy in the main form
if Membership.ValidateUser(UsernameTextBox.Text, PasswordTextBox.Text) _proxy = new MyServiceClient _proxy.ClientCredentials.UserName.UserName = "username"[code].....
Could I subscribe to the _proxy.InnerChannel.Faulted and do that clean up there?
Consider a MyForm class that contains a shadowed implementation of Show(). It also contains a CreateForm() method, which accepts an instance of the form and calls the shadowed sub:
when i call GC.ReRegisterForFinalize(obj) and changed my mind, i could call GC.SuppressFinalize(obj) and remove it from the list of object that requests finalization. problem is that when i call GC.ReRegisterForFinalize(obj) twice, it registers the object twice in the finalization-listing. i need to remove the object from the finalization-listing but multiple calls of GC.SuppressFinalize(obj) could not remove obj from the list.also, why is it acceptable for this function to be called SuppresFinalize when after calling it Finalize still occurs?
I am writing a program that tests our hardware write blocker units.When i send it the command to delete a text file on the device it should ONLY respond with my error message coded with a try...except statement.However the error message seems to be coming from windows 7 when it says "The disk cannot be written to becuase it is write protected. Please remove the write protection from the volume POCKET in drive F:" then it has the buttons Cancel, Try Again and Continue. If i click on Cancel or Continue then my error message comes up.Is there anyway I can suppress the "The disk cannot be written to." error message in Visual Basic 2010?
The data source is an Access 2003 table. I create the table in code and then populate it with 70 rows (each one empty apart from a date field). This unfortunately adds a 71st row (the placeholder for a new table row). Is there a way to stop this row appearing (I don't allow users to add rows anyway, only to edit existing ones, so this final empty row is just untidy and always empty).
