VBA Rubberducking

Duga

00:00

REFRESH!

[Minesweeper] 65 Games Played. 38 Bombs Used. 8915 Moves Performed. 15 New Users

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] 1 issues opened. 1 issue comments

Duga

03:01

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] pjshelton created comment on issue #5924: False warning of unused subs in Excel VBA though assigned to handle control events

> Version 2.5.2.5906
OS: Microsoft Windows NT 10.0.19042.0, x64
Host Product: Microsoft Office x86
Host Version: 16.0.10383.20027
Host Executable: EXCEL.EXE

I get this using the above versions.
![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/39154868/154881825-31d71ed3-ed29-409f-a7c6-8b4ed9af2513.png)

The text of the sub is
Private Sub cmdCancel_Click()
'
' cmdCancel_Click Macro
' Author: Michael Pickerill
' Date: 21/2/2007
'
txtPassword.Text = vbNullString
f

Duga

05:39

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Phyxashun starred us

2

Duga

10:11

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] jhoobergs created comment on issue #5944: Running a unit test which fakes both MsgBox.Returns and InputBox.Returns fails

> Changing the order of the fakes seems to work:
```
Fakes.MsgBox.Returns 20
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 20
```

More generally, you need to set the MsgBox first to to all values that you want the Inputbox to have. The following does not work:
```
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 1000, 1
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 2000, 2
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 300, 3
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 4000, 4
Fakes.InputBox.Returns 500, 5
Fakes.MsgBox.Returns 1
```

but this does:
```
Fakes.MsgBox.Returns 1000, 1
Fakes.Msg

M.Doerner

10:53

@Duga I guess InputBox internally uses MsgBox, which leads to these kinds of dependencies when faking both.

M.Doerner

12:57

@MathieuGuindon Why have you modified a failing test of my last PR (via a direct push to next), instead of telling me that it failed?

That test tested exactly that the issue was resolved.

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] MDoerner commented on null of commit e701c160

> This change invalidates that the prior PR actually fixes the issue it was supposed to address.
The updated test validates that wrong behaviour is present.

Mathieu Guindon

13:43

@M.Doerner ah, the PR was merged "in the dark" without a working CI pipeline; by the time I realized a test was failing the build it was already too late and all I cared about at the time was that AppVeyor actually produced a build off next.. I should have left a trail somewhere (and perhaps checked-out the branch before merging, too), sorry for the miscommunication.

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] MDoerner edited pull request #5948: Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

> Fixes #5947

This PR adds the the missing part to actually attach attributes to module constants. Previously, the attributes listener only saved attributes for variables, not constants.

M.Doerner

@MathieuGuindon @Duga This is the missing part, and the revert of the modified test.

Duga

14:07

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created comment on pull request #5948: Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

> :white_check_mark: Build Rubberduck 2.5.2.6055 completed (commit github.com/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/26c3f7f599 by @MDoerner)

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 47c62f7d on unknown branch: AppVeyor build succeeded

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] codecov[bot] created comment on pull request #5948: Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) Report
> Merging [#5948](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) (47c62f7) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/7c523c49df178d28cc222650

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] codecov[bot] edited comment on pull request #5948: Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) Report
> Merging [#5948](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) (47c62f7) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/7c523c49df178d28cc222650

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] bertah starred us

3

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] codecov[bot] edited comment on pull request #5948: Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

> # [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=h1&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) Report
> Merging [#5948](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/pull/5948?src=pr&el=desc&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=rubberduck-vba) (47c62f7) into [next](https://codecov.io/gh/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/7c523c49df178d28cc222650

Duga

14:34

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] web-flow pushed commit 535ce210 to codecov-the-ever-so-manyeth: single-quote upload filespec for codecov

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 created branch codecov-the-ever-so-manyeth

> null

Vogel612

@Duga yea, yea, I didn't add a text to the PR, I know

Duga

14:57

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 535ce210 on codecov-the-ever-so-manyeth: AppVeyor build succeeded

Duga

15:21

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created comment on pull request #5949: single-quote upload filespec for codecov

> :white_check_mark: Build Rubberduck 2.5.2.6057 completed (commit github.com/rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck/commit/d0d07c5678 by @Vogel612)

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 535ce210 on codecov-the-ever-so-manyeth: AppVeyor build succeeded

Duga

16:23

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder closed issue #5947: @VariableDescription for Constants

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] MDoerner pushed commit 1296cbda to next

Revert "Update MissingAttributeInspectionTests.cs"

This reverts commit e701c160a8a328dcabd4547ff39d0b039b590121.

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 47c62f7d on next: 97.58% (target 0.00%)

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] MDoerner pushed commit 47c62f7d to next

Save attributes for constants with the correct key

Previously, the attribute listener assumed that member attributes always referred to variables and used the corresponding declaration type in the key. This lead to a missing assignment of attributes to member constants.

Now,both options are evaluated and the correct key is used.

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] web-flow pushed commit b270ebac to next

Merge pull request #5948 from MDoerner/FixDecOnConstAgain

Fix missing part for VarDesc on constants

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] retailcoder pushed 1 commit to next

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit 535ce210 on next: 97.34% (target 0.00%)

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] web-flow pushed commit f17590b9 to next

Merge pull request #5949 from rubberduck-vba/codecov-the-ever-so-manyeth

single-quote upload filespec for codecov

Mathieu Guindon

@M.Doerner thanks!

FreeMan

Mornin' @MathieuGuindon! Good to see progress being made.

In my class, I had originally written these as Private Function..., but then decided to make them Private Property. Which would make more sense?

Private Property Get IsImportPeople() As Boolean
  IsImportPeople = this.ImportType = PeopleFile
End Property

Private Property Get IsImportLocation() As Boolean
  IsImportLocation = this.ImportType = LocationFile
End Property

There is no corresponding Let, so I guess Function would make more sense as it would avoid the Read Only Property warning, so code might feel cleaner.

(General question, not specifically targeted @Mug, just happened to follow my greeting to him.)

Duga

16:46

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created draft prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6058

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot prereleased draft prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6058

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot published prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6058

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created tag Prerelease-v2.5.2.6058

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit b270ebac on next: AppVeyor build succeeded

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit b270ebac on next: 97.58% (target 0.00%)

Mathieu Guindon

17:08

@FreeMan it's write-only properties that trigger a warning.. read-only properties are good! I think it's down to personal style: in this case a private property kinda makes sense because the value is derived from a particular state, not much going on there and it could conceivably become a public convenience/helper member that would make more sense as a property than it would as a function.

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot prereleased draft prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6059

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created draft prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6059

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot published prerelease Prerelease-v2.5.2.6059

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] rubberduck-vba-releasebot created tag Prerelease-v2.5.2.6059

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit f17590b9 on next: AppVeyor build succeeded

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] build for commit f17590b9 on next: 97.58% (target 0.00%)

Mathieu Guindon

OTOH if it's just a helper method that's totally internal and wouldn't make sense or be useful if made public, then it's an implementation detail of whatever public member is using it, and then a private function makes sense for it too!

HackSlash

Also, is it within a class object? A property is an aspect of an object. It should describe something about the object state. A function makes more sense when it's not descriptive of the object but maybe something that object can collect for you.

So that a DataCollectingObject has properties that describe it's source and options. The data itself that is collected might be returned by a function. This separates the object settings from it's primary function.

Mathieu Guindon

@FreeMan yeah the website front-end is now authenticated, admin functionality is blocked for anonymous requests and GitHub users that aren't in the RD org! Now the hard part becomes securing the API back-end, but it's not too urgent and might not even be needed: a firewall on Azure could block unauthorized access to the API. I'd just want to leave an opening to be able to trigger tag metadata update on push.

So website status: need to finish repairing the xmldoc-parsing and the page layout for FeatureItem entities (that's the content coming from xmldoc comments in RD's source code)

..and then some polishing is needed for content-editing in the admin pages, and then it's pretty much good to go

FreeMan

17:30

So, if I understand correctly, @MathieuGuindon and @HackSlash, #ItDepends.

sigh...

:)

I think in this case, I'll leave it as a function because I just don't see a reason for it to be used externally. Of course, changing the object's interface later is to be avoided, but at least if I made it a public property, I would be adding and not removing, so I wouldn't invalidate any existing code.

Thanks!

this

I used to do the property procedure in a module but lately, I find that a function makes more sense. Keep in mind that in VBx, there is no distinction between a function and a property where there is in C# (e.g. Foo vs. Foo()) which is probably why it seems so identical. In a module, a function seems to be more "honest" in the sense that there is no pretense of a backing object. YMMV....

FreeMan

thanks

HackSlash

You could also have a module that contains project level properties if you are saying the project itself is the object the property is describing. If that's a distinction you want to make. That's the only place properties in a regular module make sense to me. There might be other cases I can't think of.

Mathieu Guindon

Global objects come to mind; if you have a Private Something As SomeLibrary.SomeClass in a standard module, it can make sense to expose it to the rest of the project through a Property Get - a function would be weird there I think.

this

I'd be convinced if there was a true distinction at the syntax level. But the way it is, we can't be sure that we're looking at a Foo nor Foo() and say, "aha, this is a property, and that is a function."

The whole point with the distinction in the first place was because property implies cheap retrieval whereas function implies some calculation to be done and may fail. (not necessarily the case but you get the idea).

Mathieu Guindon

17:45

Oh yes - a getter should never throw. A function could

tbh in .net a property's getter is really just a get_Thing() function with make-up

this

that's also true in all other languages. properties are just syntax sugar

but at least in C#, it's consistently enforced that you write property as Foo and function as Foo().

Mathieu Guindon

yeah

this

In VBA... good luck trying to get it to do If Date() Then and not see it prettified into If Date Then.

Maybe not the best example because it's a property in VBA.DateTime.Date

FreeMan

@MathieuGuindon Does some of that make-up include lipstick?

FreeMan

19:05

Thank you, Access, for the silent crash then restart. :(

Vogel612

19:15

@Duga @MathieuGuindon bit quick on the trigger there... The damn upload still doesn't seem to add proper coverage across the whole project.

Hmmmmm it seems like the coverage runner we are using has been discontinued.

And it doesn't seem to produce the report format that codecov requires.

sooo ... guess it's time to change the coverage setup...

again

Duga

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 added label difficulty-02-ducky to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 added label technical-debt to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 assigned Vogel612 to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 added label meta to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 added label up-for-grabs to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 added label development-issue to issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 opened issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

> **Justification**

Opencover has been discontinued. The maintainer recommends switching to [AltCover](https://www.nuget.org/packages/altcover/), which can produce LCov reports that are definitively parseable by codecov.
Maybe we want a different coverage provider, though (Cobertura?, ???).

Since OpenCover is no longer a thing, we should make the switch and sooner rather than later.

**Description**

A working coverage report for each PR

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] Vogel612 created comment on issue #5950: Update Coverage Setup

> I'm assigning this to myself to remind myself I want to work on this when I have time, but if someone has an urgent want to work on something like this I don't need to be the one to have done it :D

HackSlash

20:51

@Vogel612, I've never done code coverage. After reading how OpenCover came and went I wonder if there is something wrong with the Microsoft recommended solution. Does coverlet not work? github.com/coverlet-coverage/coverlet

The recommendation is found here: docs.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/testing/…

Vogel612

21:57

@HackSlash sounds like a good idea

I don't see anything wrong in that in particular

HackSlash

Being part of the .NET Foundation makes me think it's more likely to remain supported than a random open source project. That's a big assumption, and a gamble I suppose.

Vogel612

that same gamble holds true with any other alternative

HackSlash

I'm pretty new to unit testing in general. I usually only test really critical bits. I know my coverage is bad so I've never tried to quantify how bad it is.

Mathieu Guindon

23:33

That gamble makes me wonder how many Silverlight projects were ported to UWP...

Duga

23:45

[rubberduck-vba/Rubberduck] 1527 stars vs. [decalage2/oletools] 1942 stars

HackSlash

23:57

LoL! Silverlight

Transcript for