> Thanks for your responses. I have created a simple spreadsheet with two buttons with macros. One has an intentional error which. The other also has an error in declaring a variable that goes nowhere. On Excel 2016 both these errors and severlal suggestions appear after a Code Inspection run. In excel 2019 no Code Inspection window appear after the run. Same on latest version of Rubberduck. Cheers Keith
Here is the logfile and spreadsheet. [RubberduckLog.txt](https://github.com/rubb
> The log suggests that rubberduck finds 86 inspection results and needs 9 ms to render them. This looks like Excel 2019 is going to be very annoying...
...before the SCP handler even begins to process the code.. and if we put it in, the VBE would take it out - paste this:
cell.Formula = "=" & cell.Row & + cell.Column
Then move to another line: the `+` is gone, and what just happened is exactly what would happen if Rubberduck were to attempt to recover the operator...
> LGTM; just one suggestion - In test cases we consider only the scenario of cls (where it should be cls.Foo. However, would it not be more common to see the misuses in cases like Bar(cls)? Having an explicit test for that case would at least guarantee that the inspection is not influenced by the different syntax.
Yes, there is with Wayne's vbDotNetLoader, but that's for .NET assembly, which would be quite a circuitous route. I'm not aware of a VBA-only (or just COM-only) method short of hopping on VBScript.
Due to "'organic' growth over time" and possibly "not the best design in the history of ever", I've got the code to grab data from an external 3rd party hosted in my .accdb. It's all designed to for interactive use. I need a simple method of running that part automatically on a daily basis. Seems easier to fire up a simple Excel "trigger" program that calls the routines from Access. I guess I could host it in Access, too, but that seems like more overhead for little benefit.
@M.Doerner My assumption is that it's more common to see code accidentally evaluating an object's default member rather than passing in the object as opposed to simply having an implicit call to the default member alone.
@this I need the code in Access for regular, interactive use. I need to be able to call it on an automatic schedule, too. To me, it's a matter of building a small front-end that loads the main Access project, calls the required routines then exits. Doesn't really matter which Office app hosts the VBA.
As opposed to building in all sorts of funky work arounds to make the current project automatically run the routines unless certain things happen, or because certain other things happened, or... something
it's just frustrating that it's nearly impossible to test av configuration locally, so my feedback cycle is 20 minutes long
I mean ... it's better than back in ye olden days when compiling a program was "give IT a stack of punch cards, go to sleep, come back the next day to find out that one was out of order after six hours of troubleshooting"
@MathieuGuindon shoot me for flip-flopping but one nice thing about the API was that it was a good model of how to do COM interop.... Removing it from the solution entirely means that model is gone from GH, too....
or the 2 weeks he spent trying to track down a bug only to discover he'd typed an l instead of a 1. Back when a lot of mechanical typewriters didn't even have a 1 key because you could use a lower-case l because they looked exactly the same...
i.e. If you were writing in FORTRAN and had very limited variable name-space, it would be hard to tell the difference between varl and var1
@this sigh... you don't. But when you learned to type on a typewriter w/o a 1 key, you were in the habit of using the l when you needed a 1. So, when you transitioned to using a card punch, muscle memory would cause you to type an l when you needed a 1 if you weren't really careful...
@this lol, no, but if you had a rectangular punch and a steady hand, you sure coulda!
thinks this one is being difficult on purpose... :/
> @Greedquest the API will officially unship when #5173 is merged into [next], however note that a branch was just created off current-[next], named RubberduckAPI; this branch will remain untouched and unmaintained; as @bclothier said in chat, that project makes a great example of how to do COM interop in C# - the DLL can still be built off that branch if needed.
@this You put a stack of cards in the input hopper, type as you normally would - the card punch punches the card (and usually printed the character on the card, too), then at the end of the line, when you hit <enter>, it fed it out into the output hopper.
It was nice enough to put the newly punched card on the back of the pile (face down pile) so you could pick them up and they'd be in the order you typed, not in reverse order...
@Vogel612 yeah, I failed to track AV was doing what WRT what Duga reported. :\
@FreeMan in general, anything that needs to sift a large amount of data could potentially require a cache, which may contribute to bloat. However, when that happens is not always apparent. One idea would be to add FileLen() trace to your code
so you can see where it blows up and know which code is doing that.
One more thing I might be missing --- if the hash comes from the same source as the file does, what's the point?
I presume the point of hash is to provide an independent verification, esp. if the file ends up hosted somewhere else, but our GH release points to the same place, right? No, we do copy it to GH, so I guess there's a point.
I had that a few years ago, and I still have active rules marking emails from mailing lists I intentionally subscribed to that prevent them from being moved to spam.
I checked this morning. Usually I get about 20-30 spam email in there. Last week it jumped to 60+, today it was 80+. There were about a dozen that are things I actually want that are getting shoved in there.
Of course, marking it "not spam" doesn't change a thing, and last time I went through this, there was no official Google support, only their discussion forums where some reasonably helpful types tried to trouble shoot and promised to send the issue on to the google themselves...
grr...
I get enough legit email in my spam that I check it pretty regularly.
getting tired of it. Anyone have any suggestions for a decent replacement?
I wonder if it's because other people sign up for stuff then decide to mark it spam instead of unsubscribing. Or, don't (remember) sign up for stuff and flag it spam.
somebody signed me up for the Sigma Xi Programs email. Except that they signed up F.R.eeman@gmail instead of FreeMan@gmail. Somehow, their email program seems to have removed the periods and is sending it to me, but won't honor the several unsubscribe requests I've submitted.
I even went to their 'contact us' page and wrote their support people about it. A few weeks later, I flagged it as spam. I figure I made a good faith effort... I wonder if the legit subscribers are now having to dig it out of their spam folders because of me...
> Using an object with a default member in a place that requires a procedure leads to a call to the default member. This is most likely an error, but at least not obvious.
<example hasresult="true">
<module name="Class1" type="Class Module"
<![CDATA[
Public Sub CodeExample()
'code example
End Sub
]]>
</module>
<module name="Module1" type="Standard Module"
<![CDATA[
Public Sub DoSomething()
'code example
End Sub
]]>
</module>
</example>
<example hasresult="false">
<![CDATA[
Public Sub CodeExample()
'code example
End Sub
]]>
</example>
I'm hoping to figure out a way to leverage some CSS to render <module> tags nicely. in the meantime having this metadata in the xml-doc can't hurt.. I'll try to make a sweep of existing examples tonight and see what other examples can use it
A possible enhancement of the quick fix would be to use a lookup table to convert to more meaningful members, like Value for non-parameterized default member accesses on Excel.Range.
I've reduced your problem to a Minimum, Verifiable and Complete Example.
The problem occurs when you assign the implicit default value of a range to a Variant variable that was passed as a Variant array.
Sub VariantArrayWTF()
Dim aBar() As Variant
Dim aFoo() As Variant
GetArray aBar
G...
Busy. Classes are keeping me studying a lot to understand the material. The Pineapple of a teachers 'teaching' amounts to "Read book. See Slides. Understand. Class dismissed" is the reason for copious studying. But that's just me venting.
I would argue that's better than having a old tenured, desiccated corpse screaming at everyone for being dumb and how it was better in ye olden days and other assorted rants.
@this I would cut the ageism out and the anti-tenure part out if I was optimizing that comment, but I share your antipathy for incuriosity and rose-tinted glasses :)
@this I agree with you, but that participation can also theoretically come outside of class time, at one's own pace.
That said, I personally enjoyed active learning. I just know it's not best for everyone.
@puzzlepiece87 what I didn't make clear was that the teacher I'm thinking of would basically insult you if you raised your hand in the classroom to ask a simple question. It was a wonder to behold.
A wonder in a train wreck sense, mind you. That motivated me to 1) put on heavy filter whenever I have to ask a question and listen only to relevant bits, few and far between they were, and 2) learn from the textbook.
@puzzlepiece87 IMO process controls is the type of class that isn't really learnable from a book alone. My undergrad professor also agreed when I asked him about it.
Then again life's not fair and this ends up being #FirstWorldProblems complaining about university classes...
Saying something could be better or even complaining about one thing isn't the same as saying your whole life is bad or that the bad thing is the predominate feature of your life, imo.
Things could be a lot better, they could be a lot worse too. Double edged depending on how you look at it.
I just wish the Pineapple professor would actively teach. Like how Mug and the rest of the ducks at the pond helped me understand C# .NET and programming.
Hmm, I wonder why they're so bad at teaching then. At least when it's a research university and their real job is competing for research grants its understandable why they are bad teachers, since they're being asked to do something outside their core performance metrics.
@IvenBach You've heard me say this before, but to repeat myself, I'm always around. I just use This Is Fine as my main room and keep an eye on Rubberducking in the sidebar.
I've reduced your problem to a Minimum, Verifiable and Complete Example.
The problem occurs when you assign the implicit default value of a range to a Variant variable that was passed as a Variant array.
Sub VariantArrayWTF()
Dim aBar() As Variant
Dim aFoo() As Variant
GetArray aBar
G...
VBA Rubberducking
VBA Rubberducking