> "Fix all occurrences in project" takes too long. It's quicker to do find & replace. After what should be a simple Fix, the circle of dots continues to rotate for a long time.
Variable uses Hungarian Notation - "Disable this inspection" does not disable it, and it is not in the Settings under Maintainability & Readability.
Calling Worksheetfunction directly can raise the runtime error, It's a bit more subtle than that - You need to catch the result in a Variant and test that for an error value, to be like Excel. Otherwise if you try to catch in say a Double you could get a type mismatch error which is a runtime error but not perhaps the one you wanted. What's odd is a I got 10 occurrences of this on the one use of Application.Sum. and 5 for Application.Transpose
> To be like Excel **95**? > In the case of Excel, the extended members of Application, are all kludges for Excel 95 compatibility. The only behavioral difference between using Application.Pi and Application.WorksheetFunctions.Pi is the way that errors are handled. Maybe the inspection Meta should warn about these differences?
Have you got specific example of functions that don't benefit from using the `WorksheetFunction` member?
> "The only behavioral difference between using Application.Pi and Application.WorksheetFunctions.Pi is the way that errors are handled. " To me, that's a design choice. I may use both ways. As I recall, I use Application.XXX when I expect an error and test the variant returned rather than throwing a RTE. Otherwise, I'd encapsulate it in a one-line function with On Error Resume Next, which I do for say Application.Find
> A `FakeProvider` factory would pretty much have to be a singleton, so we could just inject a reference into the `TestEngine` and give it a method like `StopFaking` that would dispose all of the objects that it's produced. The `TestEngine` could just call that after each test was done. If the VBE tried to use the object after that, it would just be a VBA runtime error along the lines of "The COM server has disconnected from its clients".
There would be the potential that some smartass like
> I thought we had an open one for this too, but it's possible that we might have been "tracking" this on another tangential issue that was closed. Is there a specific piece of code that's tripping this inspection?
> The rationale for the inspection isn't really to _enforce_ a specific design decision, and is probably more useful for the user that isn't familiar with the distinction. Suggesting the use of VBA error handling rather than Excel error handling is the probably the right direction - the coding error it warns about are things like this: ``` Public Sub Foo() Dim result As Variant result = Application.Sum(Me.Range("A1:A2")) Debug.Print 100 / result End Sub ``` If the `Applicati
> All of the indenter options should be disabled when a parse is running, and should be enabled when not parsing based on the avaailability of ActiveVBProject, ActiveCodePane, and whether the cursor is inside a procedure in the ActiveCodePane for "Indent Project", "Indent Module", and "Indent Procedure" respectively. I'm guessing this is an issue with how\when we're calling CanExecute for the commands.
> I have that one covered - my fork isn't ready to PR yet, but I'm moving the inspections into the Rubberduck.Parsing library as a first step towards getting inspections under the full control of the ParseCoordinator (and share cancellation tokens with the parser). But the most significant part is the rewriter API which is well under way also - when I merge my changes Rubberduck will be able to perform all code changes at once, and rewrite entire modules in one single operation (with a cav
> If you put all macros (public procedures in standard module, intended to be called externally) in the same module, and put @IgnoreModule ProcedureNotUsed at the top of that module, do the inspections still fire results for them?
> "The only behavioral difference between using Application.Pi and Application.WorksheetFunctions.Pi is the way that errors are handled. " To me, that's a design choice. I may use both ways. As I recall, I use Application.XXX when I expect an error and test the variant returned rather than throwing a RTE. Otherwise, I'd encapsulate it in a one-line function with On Error Resume Next, which I do for say Application.Find
Can I add a button to a userform in Excel? In looking it up, I see questions about doing so programmatically and dynamically. I want to add a static button to a user form to perform some task.
I'm working with Excel 2016, but this will need to be able to run on other versions like 2013 and 201...
> A: No, you can't. But there is a great work-around. You can use a CommandButton instead! It offers all of the functionality of a Button, plus some additional features that you might find useful like .Caption and a Click event handler. I'd suggest going that route.
> Regarding the long run time, the fix itself is not what takes so long. Currently, we reparse after refactoring modules (as part of the quickfix) to get the new identifier position and then run all inspections again. What is really taking long is running the inspections, possibly several times. This process will be streamlined once the changes @retailcoder mentioned above are done.
Get this - we can profile code by stepping through it with the debugger. We set the cursor position in Sub without parameters, and then start emitting F8 keystrokes. We time how long it takes from sending the F8 to the cursor moving down to the next line. When the cursor moves, we grab the information about where it is (coverage) and then we can also use the selection information to do call analysis.
> So, wrapping every single callable VBA function/method is going to be quite an undertaking - should this be broken down into smaller issues and tracked in its own project?
> It might be easier to track if we just opened one issue with a tasklist - i.e.:
- [ ] MsgBox - [ ] InputBox - [ ] Etc.
Then, just edit the original issue comment if we run across one that needs to be added. I'm not sure we want hundreds of feature request issues for these.
> I didn't get a Pending button, it straightaway started parsing. Then a Parse error and an Excel crash. I restarted Excel and it now works normally. I thought I'd report this in case it happens again.
And I thought the hack into the Access VBA runtime to do profiling was clever. This stuff is above my pay grade. "OK, so we now know that it's really easy to hook functions in the vbe7.dll with the EasyHook library." OMG. "how hard would it be to INTERCEPT ALL THE THINGS!! ? (profiler?)" That's what I was thinking of. If all I can say is "great stuff keep going" there's probably nothing I can contribute to the chat but I wanted to say it anyway.
@IvenBach 6 to 8 Months? We need to solve the tear-down problem that's throwing access-violations on exit before I start mucking around much deeper in the MDI windows. Then we need to switch everything over RD controlled code panes, re-write a huge chunk of the parser\resolver, etc., etc...
@Comintern I've been interested being a fly on the wall as you guys discuss all this stuff. Wish I knew enough to help with some of the heavy lifting, even for the light lifting.
It's all good - you underestimate the value of simply having more people testing things in the field. Especially with the integration stuff that we can't write unit tests for.
By integration testing I mean running in an actual VBE, so yes. Unit testing is different because we do everything inside a fake, controlled environment.
Unit testing I'm getting a clearer idea with. That's why you write with IoC in mind so you can 'fake it' and test as many scenarios as you need to make sure it's correct.
there's a wiki tag that's meant to be used to label issues with the wiki
ok wtf is this guy trying to do
You have code (A) that's running code (B), so when you say "the whole code", do you mean A or B? Is that code in WB1? wbk.Close is inside a loop that iterates all workbooks in the ApplicationWorkbooks collection, and that includes the workbook containing the code that's currently executing that loop (i.e. ThisWorkbook) - closing the file that contains the executing code will stop that code, that's just how it is. So please edit to clarify exactly what you mean, we're not looking at your screen and we can't read minds. — Mat's Mug1 min ago
LOL - he has code in the Auto_Open that's closing the Workbook that's running the code that opens it. so he opens a workbook and it closes the caller's workbook.
WTH would you close workbooks in Auto_Open? That's malware, not a macro.
You should reconsider your design. If I ever opened an Excel file and it closed everything else I was working on, I'd delete it an never use it again. That's malware - not a macro. — Comintern9 secs ago
Attach them solidly. Don't allow them to run. Seriously though, you're on the right track; you need to check all 4 directions though. — Mat's Mug20 secs ago
@Comintern ^ it's VB.NET / WinForms; you can't assign a New Point to a Location property in a VBA userform :)
@Hosch250 heck why not - doesn't mean they'll make you a $150K offer or even a senior dev position. worst case you get "we were looking for a more senior hire"
@Comintern what happens with the fakes if you have more than one VBE open/running? What happens if you have one project that uses GetObject to start automating another host (that already has an IDE open)? I've stepped code from one VBE to another in the past, how would fakes and/or profiler deal with that?
I'll have to de-register my debug build and register my Rubberduck-Main clone to make a "live demo" off the upstream code... my working branch isn't presentable ATM
@Comintern A/V shouldn't matter, it's just another chatroom, people are going to be asking questions
@Hosch250 I'm faking it till I make it. I've been told I'm too honest about my capabilities. That I need to say I can do more than I actually can to get in...
I've been working on the Rubberduck (an add-in for the VBA Editor /"VBE"), specifically here the VBA.Parser namespace. Here's how I ended up implementing the syntax part.
[ComVisible(false)]
public interface ISyntax
{
/// <summary>
/// Parses an instruction into a syntax node, if possibl...
@IvenBach So, I'm great at C#--so great. Now, I need to learn Angular, ASP.NET, MVC, SQL, and a couple dozen other technologies, and hold a job for 3-5 years, before anyone will hire me.
@Hosch250 I've had my degree for 2 years now. I worked my way though college before that. And I can't get a job in my field because I 'lack experience'
I'm getting my degree this May in IT Management. I have less than no experience there, so I'm falling back on programing, where I have close to 5 years (counting my beginning years producing *).
I have close to 3 years where I actually produced good-ish code now.
> You mean like these steps @comintern? help.github.com/articles/… Just be advise to consider once these changes are applied they are likely global across all issues not to resolve fakemocking issues alone.
Minor gripe: Why do people worry so much about GoTos but not separate Subs and Functions? In a lot of ways, separate Subs and Functions seem like GoTos with better features.
a GoTo/GoSub with a banner comment indeed does the same thing - without the abstraction, and without using syntactic elements to define the abstraction as part of the language
IIRC it was Robert C. Martin in Clean Code that said something about how abstractions allow you to craft the language; as a dev you're given a set of tools, and you turn them into nouns (types) and verbs (methods), adding richness and expressiveness to the language
@puzzlepiece87 - There's a huge difference writing with goto and working with goto. The easiest way to change your opinion is trying to find a bug in someone else's unstructured code. Take a look at the linked code and then see if you can find the bug from #1287.
I don't know my US presidents (yes, I get the irony) - Do I need to blame Jefferson for American spelllings, or just blame the English druids like everybody else?
> @PeterMTaylor - I was thinking of just a simple checklist, like a list of TODO items - more like an "open ended" feature request as opposed to a hundred or so separate issues. The templates are an interesting idea - it would be nicer if they could be tied to tags though.
while we're espousing 3.0 features (and while I've been digging around in the Ribbon) - I've been parsing the VBA Binary - 3.0 is going to be able to read binary VBA projects.
5
That means importing modules from closed documents (even if they're from another host format), reading Project properties (including codepage, project description and compiler constants), and diffing the current code against the last saved code. It also means having the full set of VB attributes for a document-module (including VB_Base - the GUID of the document type).
> I have a complex procedure that is causing a parser error.
The offending line is simply this:
mFrmQueue.RecordSource = strSQL
and it reports `extraneous input 'strSQL' expecting {')', WS, LINE_CONTINUATION}`.
Few things that raise red flags:
It reports the error being located at the line 313, on column 52. This is the correct line but the end of the line (after the `strSQL`) is at column 40. Hmm....
Commenting out this line _stills_ results in a parse error
If we're reading the VBA binary of a protected project, we have full resolution of the protected VBA.
if it's protected, that means the code can't have changed since last save, right?
I am delivered a malformed HTML file. If I apply a little bit of regex, I can make it valid XHTML and the content is pretty much a simple HTML table with a few attributes. Right now, I load the text, apply the regex fix, load the text into an XMLDocument and then enumerate the rows and create a new widget instance for every row (reading with XPATH), and return a widget collection once I'm done. Am I'm doing it right?
> Can you export the module and show us what you see on (313,52)? I suspect the parser error occurred while pre-processing / collecting module & member attributes. Parser tokens are otherwise exactly aligned with what's in the code panes.
> @retailcoder - That's not it. The grammar completely ignores ByRef and ByVal modifiers in eventArgument. I'd need to check, but I think the eventStmt is technically wrong too - you can't have an Optional event parameter. That one is probably fine though - the compiler would catch it but RD would just go ahead and parse it as optional.
> I'm a bit puzzled why we are discussing about SaveAsText and parsing the content.
If you wish to inspect the form/report properties & their controls, you would write code similar to this VBA snippet....
Public Sub EnumerateControlsFromEveryForm() Dim ao As Access.AccessObject Dim frm As Access.Form Dim ctl As Access.Control Dim bolWasOpenedAlready As Boolean
For Each ao In CurrentProject.AllForms bolWasOpenedAlready
> Opening the form, even in design mode, is slow, and involves a database hit (and potentially a login).
I am writing code that parses the forms/reports that are already open, but for forms/reports that are closed, parsing the SaveAsText is, IMO, the better way to go.
In my testing, parsing the Saved text is actually much faster than enumerating the controls, so even if the form is open, I'm still likely to parse the text if the form is in a saved state.
> Rubberduck.Setup.2.0.13.0.exe (5.83 MiB) - Downloaded 102 times. Last updated on 2017-03-12
@Duga everything is ever so simple when it's VBA code that processes one's project. It's when you want to make that code process everyone's projects that things go wrong...
When you start parsing should it be possible is it intended to be able to click again to parse while the first parse has Inspecting or Loading references?
Can I add a button to a userform in Excel? In looking it up, I see questions about doing so programmatically and dynamically. I want to add a static button to a user form to perform some task.
I'm working with Excel 2016, but this will need to be able to run on other versions like 2013 and 201...
I've been working on the Rubberduck (an add-in for the VBA Editor /"VBE"), specifically here the VBA.Parser namespace. Here's how I ended up implementing the syntax part.
[ComVisible(false)]
public interface ISyntax
{
/// <summary>
/// Parses an instruction into a syntax node, if possibl...
VBA Rubberducking
VBA Rubberducking