VBA Rubberducking

5:01 PM

Now they're stuck with even bigger amount of VBA code (that's STILL being written today and tomorrow) running amok all over the world. #GoodLuck, Microsoft with deprecating that.

Hosch250

@Mat'sMug Don't ever do select *.

I've had to fix enough SPs that break when the DB model changes...

Mat's Mug

I usually don't

Hosch250

LOL, I'm out of tickets.

Mat's Mug

RD PR!

Hosch250

Just two days ago, my boss and I were discussing how we are negotiating for someone to pay for a story, and I'm sitting twiddling my thumbs.

She said we might as well just start making them pay to enable it, and I can start developing it as soon as we get the request.

So, they pay for N hours, and as soon as they pay, we enable it.

"Hey, you took that long to decide if you wanted it--we figured you would, so we did it."

And if they back out, we could say "We are already N way in, what if you pay for X remaining hours" and maybe get something out of it. Other clients would likely buy it too, so...

puzzlepiece87

5:07 PM

@Hosch250 Very nice!

Hosch250

@Mat'sMug I could. Except we are testing a couple huge refactors, so I'd rather be available.

Like, this is stuff that lays the ground for refactoring much of our code base to get things to not run in-process.

And restructures our DB to be more inline with standards.

We hope our change will make it more performant too.

I rewrote the front-end of one of our widgets for the next release to make it more accessible.

Tweeting Duck

5:39 PM

Updated with proper cancellation.

Tweeted by rubberduckvba on January 12, 2018 at 5:21 PM in reply to rubberduckvba

puzzlepiece87

Just confirming: you all wouldn't run another function from an error handler, right?

Like this:

SubOpenSmallFiles()

    On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
    OpenSmallFileMethod(BigFile)
    On Error GoTo 0

ErrorHandler:
    If Err.Number = (Number for too big file) Then
        OpenBigFiles(BigFile)
    End If
    On Error Goto 0
    Resume

Yeah, I should do this instead:

SubOpenSmallFiles()

    On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
    FileText = OpenSmallFileMethod(BigFile)
    On Error GoTo 0
    If FileText = vbnullstring then FileText = OpenBigFiles(BigFile)

ErrorHandler:
    If Err.Number = (Number for too big file) Then
        On Error Goto 0
        Resume
    End If

Thanks for rubberducking with me :)

Mat's Mug

@puzzlepiece87 that error handler strikes me as rather useless though

puzzlepiece87

@Mat'sMug You would just do On Error Resume Next?

Mat's Mug

what if the error is "file not found" (or anything other than (number for too big file), actually)? procedure just bails out without saying anything?

puzzlepiece87

5:55 PM

No, I actually have an Else statement, I was just trying to drill down to my issue :)

Mat's Mug

k

puzzlepiece87

If the error is file not found then I have it pop up the runtime error, currently.

Thanks for the feedback!

this

Regarding function calling inside an active error state --- it's perfectly and in fact is correct thing to do if the function being called itself can cause errors.

puzzlepiece87

(Also for the record, I validate the file before the File Open sub, but I'm saying that I have this:)

    Else
        On Error GoTo 0
        Resume
    End If

@this Oh, that's interesting, didn't think of that. Thanks @this!

this

btw, not sure if that was merely snippet but i want to point out that your code fall through into the error handler. It shouldn't.

Brandon Barney

5:58 PM

Yeah, you're missing an Exit Sub.

this

and to provide another alternative -you can have multiple error handlers in a procedures.

though I only recommend it if there's some fall-throughs that needs to be done.

Brandon Barney

Also, you can explicitly raise the error. Err.Raise Err.Number, Description:=Err.Description. This, to me at least, is easier to follow than On Error GoTo 0 : Resume which will in turn just raise the error.

this

^ I was actually wondering about that 2 statements.

Brandon Barney

IIUC It just essentially turns off the error handler, and resumes on the line causing the error.

this

which would then propagate. Wow. Pretty confusing.

Brandon Barney

6:01 PM

But thats going to be a head-scratcher for anyone else debugging your code. Much better to either bubble up the error, or explicitly raise it.

this

Yeah, definitely do a Err.Raise, @puzzlepiece87

TBH I didn't caught that subtety, @BrandonBarney - I was thinking it'd be stuck in an infinite loop

Brandon Barney

@puzzlepiece87 You could also potentially raise a specific message (depending on what you are working with). Err.Raise Err.Number, Description:="This file is too big to open."

@this It would if the statement was turning on the same error handler. On Error GoTo ErrorHandler : Resume

That would definitely be an infinite loop.

Just throwing it out there, if you can predict the error you could write Sub OpenFile which decides between OpenSmall and OpenBig. It could also test if the file is even able to be opened before trying either.

Mat's Mug

rule of thumb, any On Error statement inside an error-handling subroutine, is a smell

that includes On Error GoTo 0

Brandon Barney

Good to know.

Mat's Mug

I mean, you're handling an error already, it's too late to tell VBA what to do when there's an error

this

6:07 PM

In fact, it won't work

Brandon Barney

Also, lastly, that first example will throw an error, regardless of whether OpenBigFile(BigFile) works or not, because you use a Resume which will start at the source of the error.

It won't?

this

I mean it won't cause you code but the error handling just won't work as expected.

Recall me earlier saying that if you call something inside an active error handler that itself can throw error, it should be inside another function with its own error handler?

If you do something like On Error Resume Next: LogThisStuff: whatever inside an active error handler, you get strange behavior -- I can't remember exactly what but it's insidious because you can only have one active error handler. You can't "switch" error handling while it's error, as Mat said.

Brandon Barney

Wait, doesn't it resume to the previously instated error handler?

I remember something along the lines of it returning control to the parent handler.

this

6:42 PM

@BrandonBarney TBH I can't remember. I just know that changing error handler inside an error handler is a bad idea™. Hmm, in fact, I think RD should slap some cold cod on people's head for doing that. It's really really insidious because as said, it will compile and seem to work.... then screw them in a major way.

Mat's Mug

@this agreed. I'd even call it a Very Bad Idea™

this

didn't know trademarks were case sensitive. :p

Mat's Mug

there :)

and now I'm desperately trying to find a synonym of "idea" that starts with an "A"

this

VBA Rudderduck: Saving programmers from Very Bad Idea™ since 2015.

2

Mat's Mug

ha, Very Bad Assumption™ works!

this

6:48 PM

aw, can't edit.

Rudderduck: Saving programmers from Very Bad Assumptions™ since 2015.

3

Mat's Mug

haha

"Saving programmers from VBA since 2015"

that's golden

On Error Resume Next is NOT an ***ErrorHandler***. It suppresses errors an allows the code to keep executing in an error state, which means your code is making a Very Bad Assumption™. — Mat's Mug 40 secs ago

this

On Error Resume Next is VBA's peril-sensitive sunglasses.

Mat's Mug

"pink glasses" happy pill, yeah

this

"hey-o, I saw the messagebox "Done!", so it worked!"

WaynePhillipsEA

7:03 PM

@M.Doerner if you do happen to have a go with the unique RCWs, you will find that it exposes weaknesses in the current implementation of the safe wrappers.

Currently it's relying on FinalReleaseComObject, but having unique RCWs makes this ineffective.

M.Doerner

We never call FinalReleaseComObject.

WaynePhillipsEA

So subsequently, some COM objects are then not being released again... and crashes.

IMO, FinalReleaseComObject should not be used anyway.

hmm how come its in safecom wrappers

this

I presumed it was there for completeness' sake in case we had a legit case.

M.Doerner

It was added eons ago when the code was alive the first time. Then it was reactivated when the rest was reactivated.

WaynePhillipsEA

right ok, i'll have another look

M.Doerner

7:07 PM

It cannot be called anymore since I made the Release method private.

Only Dispose ever calls Release.

Mat's Mug

hmm the dead code should probably be removed

M.Doerner

I left it for the event that we want to make it publicly available again.

WaynePhillipsEA

ok gtk

M.Doerner

However, I would not mind removing it.

I could do it as part of my next PR.

Mat's Mug

:+1:

this

7:10 PM

Wondering - could a COM leak lead to a managed leak?

WaynePhillipsEA

With using the unique RCWs, I get a few unreleased COM objects in my log:

Rubberduck._Extension#0 {0014} #THREAD19f8 000000. WRAP0040:$0603a094 [Window x2]
Rubberduck._Extension#0 {0014} #THREAD19f8 000000. WRAP0035:$0603accc [IConnectionPointContainer]
Rubberduck._Extension#0 {0014} #THREAD19f8 000000. WRAP0034:$0603acb4 [_VBProjects]

Mat's Mug

interesting

WaynePhillipsEA

Window occurs twice for each tool window

plus some CommandBar entries as well

M.Doerner

The windows do not use the SafeComWrapper.

WaynePhillipsEA

are we talking about the window as returned from CreateToolWindow

this

7:12 PM

we also don't have direct control on the IConnectionPointContainer -- that would be implicit via event handler setup/teardown.

M.Doerner

At least I did.

WaynePhillipsEA

Yeah, I think for the connection point container, you're limited, and will need the final GC.Collect to ensure (or hope) that gets released

M.Doerner

Wait, the actual window gets wrapped.

this

@M.Doerner I think all windows, regardless of its type, should be wrapped. They are COM, after all, no?

Mat's Mug

if a commandbar is leaking, it could be the leaked IConnectionPointContainer, no?

M.Doerner

7:13 PM

I was thinking of the special wrapped dockable windows.

Mat's Mug

hmm, or _VBProjects could be

this

@WaynePhillipsEA can we aggregate that like we did for other interfaces?

M.Doerner

I guess it is the projects collection.

WaynePhillipsEA

@this, most probably

M.Doerner

I wonder where we no not wrap that projects collection.

WaynePhillipsEA

7:15 PM

I think the unique RCWs is making the natural GC even less likely to occur, and so is exposing the final few points where COM objects are leaking

(occassionally)

I might be able to track down the source code line, but got to get the kids to bed so it will be a bit later

Brandon Barney

Not quite sure if I have ever seen uglier code: stackoverflow.com/questions/48232211/…

M.Doerner

Oh, I think it is the projects collection we cache to attach the events.

WaynePhillipsEA

bbl guys

Mat's Mug

later!

@M.Doerner makes sense

M.Doerner

Actually, we wrap that target.

However, I am not too sure what another managed reference to the target does to the reference count on the RCW.

Mat's Mug

7:20 PM

if we over-release, the RCW becomes eligible for GC too early, right?

M.Doerner

No, but as soon as the count reaches zero, it detaches from the COM object.

That is even worse.

Mat's Mug

ouch

well, the good news is that we'd know quite fast

this

I wonder what unique RCW means for performance. I assume they made RCW shared to optimize the resources.

M.Doerner

I guess so, too.

puzzlepiece87

7:35 PM

@Mat'sMug I'm confused. So if you're about to Exit Sub anyway, you'd put the On Error Goto 0 as the next step outside the Sub?

Mat's Mug

@puzzlepiece87 I wouldn't put On Error GoTo 0 anywhere :)

this

@puzzlepiece87 why would we? Exit sub clears the error state already.

puzzlepiece87

@this Ah, I didn't realize that.

this

@Mat'sMug FWIW, I do use them rarely, usually for procedures that should throw errors back to caller but has localized error ignorer.

Mat's Mug

I'd say I pretty much only use OEG0 together with OERN

so yeah, same

this

7:40 PM

That's about the only good use for OEG0 yeah.

Mat's Mug

to the left, uh, wego wego, uh, to the right, uh, wego wego

this

BTW, I'm snickering that it reads as "Oh, ego" :p

Therefore, you can size one's ego by # of OEG0 in one's VBA code.

puzzlepiece87

@BrandonBarney This would be my favorite solution since I generally like avoiding errors at all costs, but I haven't figured out a way to do that yet.

Mat's Mug

huh wtf

2

Q: Subscript out of range for DIR Function

My VBA code is cycling through a folder with thousands of excel workbooks in it, and about 180 workbooks into the loop I got a subscript out of range error (run-time error 9) InputPath = inputFolder & "*" ImportFileName = Dir(InputPath) Do While ImportFileName <> "" 'code of some sort...

puzzlepiece87

This is the problem line: strEntireFile = Space$(fileCurrent.Size). I'm not sure how to avoid that because 1. Excel seems rather variable in the max string size it will allow and 2. I wouldn't want to hard code it, but I'm not sure how to make it dynamic.

So for now, error handling.

this

7:44 PM

@puzzlepiece87 sometime the quickest thing to do is to actually try it and handle the error.

puzzlepiece87

@this Ha, you'd probably laugh at me then.

Mat's Mug

@puzzlepiece87 Excel has nothing to do with max string size

puzzlepiece87

I have a bunch of error prevention functions saved up.

DoesSheetExist, DoesFileExist, DoesFolderExist, etc.

this

As alluded to, for those types of case, I usually wrap it in a localized OERN which I then retry in next step so there's a clear progression of how things will degrade before it quits for good. Sometimes it's not worth it chasing the exact error number.

Mat's Mug

*usually

puzzlepiece87

7:47 PM

@this That makes sense.

@Mat'sMug What ends up being the final determinant of max string size?

Mat's Mug

Excel is the host application, it provides an object model and a host document. VBA does everything else.

this

IIRC, it can be up to 2 GB large but in practice it's much less because you're constrained by how OS manage memory.

Try to allocate too much, then OS will say "sorry, no can do". Because there's lot of things going, it's possible for a large allocation to succeed one time, then fail the next time.

puzzlepiece87

@this Yup, this has been my exact experience.

WaynePhillipsEA

@M.Doerner, @this, @Mat'sMug It gets interesting...

puzzlepiece87

So I used an error handler since I can't think of a good way to test if it can assign properly. And now I think I'm going to put OpenBigFile() in there

WaynePhillipsEA

7:53 PM

This is the command bar leak: logger.Trace($"Removed handler for: {parent.GetType().Name} '{Target.Caption}' (tag: {Tag}, hashcode:{Target.GetHashCode()})");

parent.GetType() causes the leak

this

there are also other constraints as well - the program may have much lower limit, so even a 50 MB might be asking for too much, @puzzlepiece87. That said, you might need to look at ADODB.Stream if you are really managing large chunk of data...

Mat's Mug

@puzzlepiece87 why not just define a reasonable cutoff byte size? Say, anything greater than 16,384KB goes through the "large file" pipeline - or whatever you feel is right

@WaynePhillipsEA oh, crap

WaynePhillipsEA

actually, wait the debugger is not even hitting that line

breakpoints in event subscriptions get hit as normal don't they?

Mat's Mug

hmm, that means we're never deregistering event handlers for cmdbar buttons??

@WaynePhillipsEA should, yeah

stupid question: is the breakpoint hollow?

WaynePhillipsEA

no, it's red

Mat's Mug

7:59 PM

ok. should be hit then

WaynePhillipsEA

sorry yes it is hollow. says source code different. let me rebuild

puzzlepiece87

@this So far I was planning on using this: Microsoft's How to Seek Past VBA's 2GB File Limit

Mat's Mug

@WaynePhillipsEA this typically happens when you're running a debug build but the COM registration is for a release build

i.e. VS debugger is running, but the VBE is loading another build entirely

puzzlepiece87

@Mat'sMug That could definitely be a good idea for the future, but since I don't understand API calls very well I currently have a strong preference for SaveEntireFileToString whenever possible.

Mat's Mug

@puzzlepiece87 that's fine for a few MB's, tops

this

8:05 PM

@puzzlepiece87 Sure. You could import a boatload of API and do high risk stunts off the 100 meter high live electric wire. Or you could just use ADODB.Stream

Mat's Mug

^

puzzlepiece87

@Mat'sMug So far I've had good experiences with it until around 1.5-2 GB, but my current files are 20GB.

@this I appreciate that advice, I'll go do ADODB.Stream now :)

@this We all need to live a little sometimes ;)

Mat's Mug

use a stream. even 1.5GB is a ridiculous amount of data to load into a single string.

this

Beyond ridiculous. Ridiculous was 250 MB.

Mat's Mug

kids these days... back in the days when your file was more than 1.44MB you'd do everything you could to shave off a byte here and a byte there so it could fit your damn floppy.

this

8:10 PM

TBH, I wouldn't try to allocate more than 10 MB in-memory.

@Mat'sMug IKR!

Mat's Mug

#GetOffMyLawn

:)

this

#640KBOughtToBeEnoughForAnyone

Mat's Mug

^^^^^^

this

@puzzlepiece87 you should take note of this, however: docs.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/ado/reference/ado-api/…

Because its Size is a long, it can't tell you the size of the file > than 2 GB so you'll have to blindly read until you reach the EOS

Mat's Mug

EOS?

oh

nm

this

8:16 PM

For posterity - EOS = End of stream

Mat's Mug

@this hmm, will wrap or overflow?

this

it says trunucate, so I read it as overflow.

Mat's Mug

true new Kate huh

this

Thinking about it, it also implies that you can't use Position, either.

You'd have to do stuff like Do Until .EOS: buffer = .Read(BufferSize) : 'Do stuff with buffer... : Loop

puzzlepiece87

@this Yeah, I hit something similar with strEntireFile = Space$(fileCurrent.Size)

There's about an 50 MB margin where instead of "file too large" error, it gives illegal value because the long overflows back to negative numbers.

I could be wrong but that warning sounds similar in concept.

Mat's Mug

8:21 PM

wraps then

this

You get to have the rare joy of being the only VBA programmer to read 2+ GB file in the whole planet. :p

Mat's Mug

lol

strEntireFile can't happen

first, it defeats the purpose of streaming

this

@Mat'sMug it's wrapping by overflowing. ;)

Mat's Mug

yeah I but I meant "overflows" as in RTE6

this

ah - yeah I don't think RTE6 will ever happen with Size and Position can't reach beyond the 2GB boundary.

woudl be funky to see negative number once we pass the 2GB boundary, though. :p

Hmm, if it's negative, does that mean Position can still visit between >2 and <4 GB region of the file...

Truly don't know. Never had to deal with files that big. The biggest I ever handled was 250 MB, give or take.

puzzlepiece87

8:32 PM

Thanks again for pushing me in the right direction, @this. Stream is doing everything I was already attempting to do with the API calls in a way I can easily follow and feel confident with.

this

hopefully it will take you beyond the 2 GB however.

probably should verify that first before you invest too much in it

puzzlepiece87

Sounds good, I will try

Since it has byte streaming ability I'm guessing it could be possible, we'll see.

this

is it binary or text file?

Mat's Mug

seriously, what kind of file is that???

puzzlepiece87

Text

this

8:37 PM

then you should be using text if you can. You know the encoding, right?

puzzlepiece87

It's an audit for an entire quarter for one of our biggest markets.

this

ok... why not split them in.... week?

puzzlepiece87

I can look it up

this

whoever wrote that file need to be pointed at and laughed for being so stingy with files. :p

puzzlepiece87

Probably because then the health plan would have to run the query 12 times and they lack the willingness or technical expertise to do that :P

this

8:39 PM

wait, it's a query?

why are we even dealing with files?!?

Sorry, I shouldn't overreach. I need to assume you have a reason why you can't just query data directly yourself.

puzzlepiece87

No, those are valid questions :P

this

ones i'm sure you already asked yourself and don't need to repeat to me.

puzzlepiece87

It makes me laugh too

Hey, I enjoy commiserating with people :)

this

Anyway, so there is no magic "I'm encoded in this encoding" decoder ring for text files generally. XML at least let gives you hint with the ? directive at the start of file

puzzlepiece87

Dude, @Hosch250's workplace is divided over whether they want to use Git, I think this is a fine place to bang our heads on our desks xD

this

8:44 PM

Point granted.

Hosch250

LOL.

puzzlepiece87

Oh what? I'm surprised it wasn't in the details section of the file properties

But yes, I just got there and didn't see it.

this

Nope. you've been living a lie.

puzzlepiece87

Also, I misremembered the file size, they're 2.5 GB thankfully.

There's only like 3 ways of encoding, right? So I can just try them all till I get the right one.

this

text editors actually do no better than guessing based on data they see in the text files.

...... :|

puzzlepiece87

8:45 PM

It's like ANSI and UTF-16 and maybe one other?

this

:(

You in for a world of pain, man.

puzzlepiece87

I'm sorry for the pain I'm causing you xD

Hosch250

@puzzlepiece87 LOL.

puzzlepiece87

Lol, I'm asking for it with my Firefighter-In-Chief job. It's pain pain every day.

Hosch250

unicode, UTF-8, UTF-7, and a million others.

this

8:46 PM

no no, this is me feeling bad because you are about to discover the joy of text encoding.

^^

Windows-1282, ANSI are other two common encoding.

puzzlepiece87

It's like the opposite of this: xkcd: "You're one of today's lucky 10,000!"

Hosch250

UTF-32, ASCII.

this

Way too many

puzzlepiece87

I'll try ANSI first since that's the default for Notepad, then go from there.

this

Do note that you won't get an error.

It could look great .... until 10,00,000th character in, there's few chinese characters. Oops!

i'd ask whoever is writing those files what encoding they are using instead of try to guess.

Hosch250

8:50 PM

@this Odds are they don't know.

Or care.

this

and that annoys me immensely.

Hosch250

Me too.

I mean, it's only so long until I get sucked into the file upload process here.

I mean, you should hear them complaining.

XYZ corp. puts unprintable characters, including EOF, in the middle of their CSV's.

this

TBH when I first learn that it was all one big sham, I was genuinely shocked. I had expected that everyone would be more upfront with what encoding to be used.... right?

Hosch250

It makes me want to ROFL, then commit seppuku.

@this No, because they don't know.

Everyone makes that assumption.

And that's the reason it's so bad.

this

@puzzlepiece87 you should read this.... joelonsoftware.com/2003/10/08/…

WaynePhillipsEA

8:53 PM

@M.Doerner... does this look like one: private static VB.VBProjects _projects;

this

@Hosch250 The magic of abstraction at work. :)

M.Doerner

That is the one from VBA.VBProjects, right?

WaynePhillipsEA

yeah

looks to be a non wrapped reference

M.Doerner

We do wrap the target in a SafeComWrapper afterwards.

It gets assigned in the constructor that hands the RCW to the base class afterwards.

However, I guess that still increases the RCW's internal reference count.

WaynePhillipsEA

yeah, exactly

M.Doerner

8:59 PM

Problem with wrapping it is, it gets assigned in the constructor of the wrapper.

WaynePhillipsEA

yeah, looks wrong to my eyes

M.Doerner

I think we are doing something wrong with the static events, anyway.

this

@M.Doerner maybe we can study/borrow the events implementation from NetOffice?

M.Doerner

Might be worth a look.

WaynePhillipsEA

I'm pretty sure that is the VBProjects leak mentioned earlier anyway

M.Doerner

9:02 PM

We could also attach to the actual Events object.

puzzlepiece87

@this Finished.

this

@M.Doerner given that's what MSDN documentation recommends for implementation within Vb6 i think that makes sense. You'd also get the ability to filter events (e.g. to exclude projects we can't use perhaps?)

M.Doerner

Anyway, with the change I am implementing atm, there should only be one reference to the VBProjects collection left in RD, i.e. after some more cleanup.

WaynePhillipsEA

sounds good

M.Doerner

Attaching to that object might also cure our issue with listening only to the events of one VBComponents collection.

WaynePhillipsEA

9:05 PM

there is a similar unwrapped reference here: private static VB.VBComponents _components;

M.Doerner

Same reason why it is this way.

WaynePhillipsEA

yep sure, just needs tweaking

or reworking if your sorting the events out

M.Doerner

That class is actually somewhat broken because the event registration only allows us to listen to the events of the first collection.

WaynePhillipsEA

ah, understood

M.Doerner

The documentation states that the events fire for all components. However, that documentation talks about the event provider on the Events object on the VBE.

WaynePhillipsEA

9:10 PM

BTW the command bar leak was a red herring, as I wasn't working off a clean source

@this IConnectionPointContainer can most probably be sorted without using aggregates

this

Sounds like, yeah

we'd only need to aggregate if there were an actual bug in the implementation similar to UserControl. I don't think that'll be the case. At least I hope not!

WaynePhillipsEA

We'll just need to define/implement the IConnectionPoint* interfaces ourselves, and VBE will accept them.

Mat's Mug

@WaynePhillipsEA lol, I like how you say "just"

WaynePhillipsEA

Problem is, this won't play nice with managed events/delegates.

Instead of managed events, you'd have to provide an object implementing the correct source-interface

M.Doerner

Completely unrelated, does anyone know how I can get the MS docs page to display in english? I really hate those crappy translations into german and the hover over to display a box with the original is BS.

WaynePhillipsEA

9:19 PM

@M.Doerner do you happen to know how many event hooks are there into the VBE

this

@WaynePhillipsEA wouldn't this help? msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/at4fb09f(v=vs.110).aspx

@M.Doerner is your MSDN going to something like de-XX? change to en-us.

WaynePhillipsEA

not really. IConnectionPoint* works off com interfaces

M.Doerner

@this Thanks for the pointer.

this

ah. In that case, let's hope we won't need to get to that point. :)

WaynePhillipsEA

Oh you definitely will... if you want to properly control the release of the IConnectionPointContainer

otherwise its always going to be up to the GC

this

9:22 PM

@M.Doerner no problem - I'm sorry I don't know how to do this permanently - I imagine MSDN bases this on your profile or possibly on your IP.

M.Doerner

I total, we should have something like eight. One implicitly as an add-in and then explicit ones for the projects and components events.

WaynePhillipsEA

Oh that's not too bad then.

M.Doerner

Probably the IP.

I could be wrong, but I think we do not attach to any other events.

this

Hmm. Couldn't we just implement the outgoing com interface and pass that in as the source interface using ComSourceInterface attribute?

WaynePhillipsEA

Oh yes... totally forgot about that. that should work

this

9:24 PM

but.... the VBE's outgiong COM interfaces are weird as hell.

WaynePhillipsEA

oh hang on...

this

In OleView, they are empty.

WaynePhillipsEA

It should still work. They are somewhat defined in VBProjects.cs, just not as proper interfaces.

If you create them as proper dispinterfaces (not dual), and use them for ComSourceInterface, it should work

this

Yeah

WaynePhillipsEA

But question is, would you get any better control over IConnectionPointContainer doing it that way

this

9:31 PM

I have to think that .NET has to be correctly setting/disposing the container as part of handling the ComSourceInterface

WaynePhillipsEA

I suspect, the GC might still hang on to an extra implicit reference to that interface, even when you call ReleaseComObject on the root object

this

Maybe that's optimistic for me. But even so, we still have to have the interfaces defined anyway even for aggregated IConnection*** objects, no?

so we can start with using COM Interop attributes first then seeing how it improves thing and if it still doesn't, aggregate the rest?

WaynePhillipsEA

Exactly, first try would be to migrate to the ComSourceInterface, and if that didn't work, we'd just have to implement a bit of the IConnectionPoint* interfaces

^ yup

this

great.

WaynePhillipsEA

it's a plan

right I'm off. I'll let you guys discuss the finer details, but if you want me to do/write anything let me know

this

9:36 PM

@M.Doerner if you want / is ok with you, I can make changes or will it conflict with your upcoming PR?

GN, Wayne!

night all

'night!

night

Duck check: Has anyone else had an issue with Application.Transpose() replacing characters with '?'

M.Doerner

@this Just go ahead.

I am more working on the code using the wrappers.

this

9:42 PM

OK, thanks.

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] bclothier commented on issue #3697: Code Explorer should work without parsing

> Just to throw it out - would it be more simpler to substitute the CE with our custom PE? That wouldn't require pre-parsing service and would be a matter of substituting the view/viewmodel with the other once parsed? That would not require any temporary Declaration. Without the parsing, we can't have folders anyway, so at least it'd allow for searching/listing/opening objects just like in PE.

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder commented on issue #3697: Code Explorer should work without parsing

> @bclothier that's oddly much simpler and less dangerous indeed. But is it worth the effort?

Duga

10:26 PM

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rkapka synchronized pull request #3685: Moved ToDo markers to .settings file

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 5eb456bb on unknown branch: No report found to compare against

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] [codecov[bot]](github.com/apps/codecov) commented on pull request #3685: Moved ToDo markers to .settings file

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> :exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (`next@4a6db52`). [Click here to learn what that means](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/error-reference#section-missing-base-commit).
> The diff coverage is `53.33%`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685/graphs/tree.svg?width=650&height=150&src=pr&token=0zIVyLTgaw)](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 5eb456bb on unknown branch: No report found to compare against

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] [codecov[bot]](github.com/apps/codecov) commented on pull request #3685: Moved ToDo markers to .settings file

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> :exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (`next@4a6db52`). [Click here to learn what that means](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/error-reference#section-missing-base-commit).
> The diff coverage is `53.33%`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685/graphs/tree.svg?token=0zIVyLTgaw&src=pr&height=150&width=650)](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rkapka commented on Rubberduck.Parsing/Inspections/Resources/InspectionsUI.resx of pull request #3695: Iss388 obsolete def type statement

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit e6eacab5 on unknown branch: AppVeyor build failed

BUILD FAILURE!

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rkapka synchronized pull request #3685: Moved ToDo markers to .settings file

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] [codecov[bot]](github.com/apps/codecov) commented on pull request #3685: Moved ToDo markers to .settings file

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685?src=pr&el=h1) Report
> :exclamation: No coverage uploaded for pull request base (`next@4a6db52`). [Click here to learn what that means](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/error-reference#section-missing-base-commit).
> The diff coverage is `53.33%`.

[![Impacted file tree graph](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/3685/graphs/tree.svg?width=650&height=150&token=0zIVyLTgaw&src=pr)](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rkapka commented on Rubberduck.Parsing/Inspections/Resources/InspectionsUI.resx of pull request #3695: Iss388 obsolete def type statement

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rkapka commented on pull request #3695: Iss388 obsolete def type statement

> @IvenBach I don't think this PR closes the issue. You created the inspection, but there's still a quick fix left to implement.

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder commented on RetailCoder.VBE/UI/Inspections/InspectionResultsControl.xaml of pull request #3695: Iss388 obsolete def type statement

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder added label PR-Status: WIP to pull request #3695: Iss388 obsolete def type statement

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 303b589d on unknown branch: AppVeyor build succeeded

Mat's Mug

10:52 PM

TTQW

Hosch250

Thanks, @WaynePhillipsEA, but I don't VBA.

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] PeterMTaylor commented on issue #3699: Data-driven tests

> @Hosch250 sounds good could I ask to establish a criterion what makes a good/acceptable data-driven test compared to a unit test already set up in RD tests

puzzlepiece87

11:40 PM

@this @Mat'sMug btw, this post is why I originally started using #Get for reading large text files: stackoverflow.com/questions/1376756/…

This is my whole original function, for reference:

Function SaveFileToString(ByVal fileCurrent As Scripting.File) As String

    '-- Copy Text File Contents to String --
    'Get Available File Integer for Opening
    Dim intSystemFileNumber As Integer 'System-assigned number for file management
    intSystemFileNumber = FreeFile()
    'Open Text File
    Open fileCurrent For Binary As #intSystemFileNumber
    On Error GoTo ErrorHandler
    Dim strEntireFile As String
    'Resize string to length of text file
    strEntireFile = Space$(fileCurrent.Size)

Thanks again for the ADO advice, @this. I'm still playing with it.

Mat's Mug

11:54 PM

@puzzlepiece87 rule of thumb, take the code from answers, not questions... esp. on SO

Also OP's definition of "very, very large file" seems several orders of magnitude under yours

Transcript for