Search Results

Search found 1200 results on 48 pages for 'assemblies'.

Page 1/48 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Removing all assemblies from <compilation><assemblies> in ASP.NET 4 web.config

    - by Merritt
    I removed all the 'add' elements in the compilation/assemblies element. So initially in my application's root web.config file: <compilation debug="true" targetFramework="4.0"> <assemblies> <add assembly="System.Web.Abstractions, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add assembly="System.Web.Routing, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add assembly="System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add assembly="System.Web.DynamicData, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"/> <add assembly="System.Data.Linq, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089"/> <add assembly="System.Web.Entity, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089"/> <add assembly="System.Data.Entity, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"/> </assemblies> </compilation> Now it looks like: <compilation debug="true" targetFramework="4.0"> <assemblies> </assemblies> </compilation> And my application still works. The project file still has all the references I removed, but this section appears to be unused during compilation (inside visual studio). What is going on?

    Read the article

  • Assemblies mysteriously loaded into new AppDomains

    - by Eric
    I'm testing some code that does work whenever assemblies are loaded into an appdomain. For unit testing (in VS2k8's built-in test host) I spin up a new, uniquely-named appdomain prior to each test with the idea that it should be "clean": [TestInitialize()] public void CalledBeforeEachTestMethod() { AppDomainSetup appSetup = new AppDomainSetup(); appSetup.ApplicationBase = @"G:\<ProjectDir>\bin\Debug"; Evidence baseEvidence = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.Evidence; Evidence evidence = new Evidence( baseEvidence ); _testAppDomain = AppDomain.CreateDomain( "myAppDomain" + _appDomainCounter++, evidence, appSetup ); } [TestMethod] public void MissingFactoryCausesAppDomainUnload() { SupportingClass supportClassObj = (SupportingClass)_testAppDomain.CreateInstanceAndUnwrap( GetType().Assembly.GetName().Name, typeof( SupportingClass ).FullName ); try { supportClassObj.LoadMissingRegistrationAssembly(); Assert.Fail( "Should have nuked the app domain" ); } catch( AppDomainUnloadedException ) { } } [TestMethod] public void InvalidFactoryMethodCausesAppDomainUnload() { SupportingClass supportClassObj = (SupportingClass)_testAppDomain.CreateInstanceAndUnwrap( GetType().Assembly.GetName().Name, typeof( SupportingClass ).FullName ); try { supportClassObj.LoadInvalidFactoriesAssembly(); Assert.Fail( "Should have nuked the app domain" ); } catch( AppDomainUnloadedException ) { } } public class SupportingClass : MarshalByRefObject { public void LoadMissingRegistrationAssembly() { MissingRegistration.Main(); } public void LoadInvalidFactoriesAssembly() { InvalidFactories.Main(); } } If every test is run individually I find that it works correctly; the appdomain is created and has only the few intended assemblies loaded. However, if multiple tests are run in succession then each _testAppDomain already has assemblies loaded from all previous tests. Oddly enough, the two tests get appdomains with different names. The test assemblies that define MissingRegistration and InvalidFactories (two different assemblies) are never loaded into the unit test's default appdomain. Can anyone explain this behavior?

    Read the article

  • How to pre-load all deployed assemblies for an AppDomain

    - by Andras Zoltan
    Given an App Domain, there are many different locations that Fusion (the .Net assembly loader) will probe for a given assembly. Obviously, we take this functionality for granted and, since the probing appears to be embedded within the .Net runtime (Assembly._nLoad internal method seems to be the entry-point when Reflect-Loading - and I assume that implicit loading is probably covered by the same underlying algorithm), as developers we don't seem to be able to gain access to those search paths. My problem is that I have a component that does a lot of dynamic type resolution, and which needs to be able to ensure that all user-deployed assemblies for a given AppDomain are pre-loaded before it starts its work. Yes, it slows down startup - but the benefits we get from this component totally outweight this. The basic loading algorithm I've already written is as follows. It deep-scans a set of folders for any .dll (.exes are being excluded at the moment), and uses Assembly.LoadFrom to load the dll if it's AssemblyName cannot be found in the set of assemblies already loaded into the AppDomain (this is implemented inefficiently, but it can be optimized later): void PreLoad(IEnumerable<string> paths) { foreach(path p in paths) { PreLoad(p); } } void PreLoad(string p) { //all try/catch blocks are elided for brevity string[] files = null; files = Directory.GetFiles(p, "*.dll", SearchOption.AllDirectories); AssemblyName a = null; foreach (var s in files) { a = AssemblyName.GetAssemblyName(s); if (!AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies().Any( assembly => AssemblyName.ReferenceMatchesDefinition( assembly.GetName(), a))) Assembly.LoadFrom(s); } } LoadFrom is used because I've found that using Load() can lead to duplicate assemblies being loaded by Fusion if, when it probes for it, it doesn't find one loaded from where it expects to find it. So, with this in place, all I now have to do is to get a list in precedence order (highest to lowest) of the search paths that Fusion is going to be using when it searches for an assembly. Then I can simply iterate through them. The GAC is irrelevant for this, and I'm not interested in any environment-driven fixed paths that Fusion might use - only those paths that can be gleaned from the AppDomain which contain assemblies expressly deployed for the app. My first iteration of this simply used AppDomain.BaseDirectory. This works for services, form apps and console apps. It doesn't work for an Asp.Net website, however, since there are at least two main locations - the AppDomain.DynamicDirectory (where Asp.Net places it's dynamically generated page classes and any assemblies that the Aspx page code references), and then the site's Bin folder - which can be discovered from the AppDomain.SetupInformation.PrivateBinPath property. So I now have working code for the most basic types of apps now (Sql Server-hosted AppDomains are another story since the filesystem is virtualised) - but I came across an interesting issue a couple of days ago where this code simply doesn't work: the nUnit test runner. This uses both Shadow Copying (so my algorithm would need to be discovering and loading them from the shadow-copy drop folder, not from the bin folder) and it sets up the PrivateBinPath as being relative to the base directory. And of course there are loads of other hosting scenarios that I probably haven't considered; but which must be valid because otherwise Fusion would choke on loading the assemblies. I want to stop feeling around and introducing hack upon hack to accommodate these new scenarios as they crop up - what I want is, given an AppDomain and its setup information, the ability to produce this list of Folders that I should scan in order to pick up all the DLLs that are going to be loaded; regardless of how the AppDomain is setup. If Fusion can see them as all the same, then so should my code. Of course, I might have to alter the algorithm if .Net changes its internals - that's just a cross I'll have to bear. Equally, I'm happy to consider SQL Server and any other similar environments as edge-cases that remain unsupported for now. Any ideas!?

    Read the article

  • Resolving Assemblies, the fuzzy way

    - by David Rutten
    Here's the setup: A pure DotNET class library is loaded by an unmanaged desktop application. The Class Library acts as a plugin. This plugin loads little baby plugins of its own (all DotNET Class Libraries), and it does so by reading the dll into memory as a byte-stream, then Assembly asm = Assembly.Load(COFF_Image); The problem arises when those little baby plugins have references to other dlls. Since they are loaded via the memory rather than directly from the disk, the framework often cannot find these referenced assemblies and is thus incapable of loading them. I can add an AssemblyResolver handler to my project and I can see these referenced assemblies drop past. I have a reasonably good idea about where to find these referenced assemblies on the disk, but how can I make sure that the Assmebly I load is the correct one? In short, how do I reliably go from the System.ResolveEventArgs.Name field to a dll file path, presuming I have a list of all the folders where this dll could be hiding)?

    Read the article

  • Complicated API issue with calling assemblies dynamically?

    - by Stefanos Tses
    I have an interesting challenge that I'm wondering if anyone here can give me some direction. I'm writing a .Net windows forms application that runs on a network and uses an SQL Server to save and pull data. I want to offer a mini "plugin" API, where developers can build their own assemblies and implement a specific interface (IDataManipulate). These assemblies then can be used by my application to call the interface functions and do something. I can create assemblies using my API, copy the file to a folder in my local hard drive and configure my application to use Reflection to call a specific function from the implemented interface (IDataManipulate.Execute). The problem: Since the application will be installed in multiple workstations in the network, is impossible to copy the plugin dlls the users will create to each machine. Solutions I tried: Solution 1 Copy the API dll to a network share. Problem: Requires AllowPartiallyTrustedCallersAttribute, which requires .Net singing, which I can't force from my users. Solution 2 (preferred) Serialize the dll object, save it to the database, deserialize it and call IDataManipulate.Execute. Problem: After deserialization, I try cast it to a IDataManipulate object but returns an error looking for the actual dll file. Solution 3 Save the dll bytes as byte[] to the database and recreate the dll at the local PC every time the user starts my application. Problem: Dll may have dependencies, which I don't know if I can detect. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Splitting assemblies - finding the balance (avoiding overkill)

    - by M.A. Hanin
    I'm writing a wide component infrastructure, to be used in my projects. Since not all projects will require every component created, I've been thinking of splitting the component into discrete assemblies, so that every application developed will only be deployed with the required assemblies. I assume that creating an assembly has some storage overhead (the assembly's code, wrapping whatever is inside). Therefore, there must be some limit to the advantage gained by splitting an assembly - a certain point where splitting the assembly is worse than keeping it united (storage-wise and performance-wise). Now, here is the question: how do I know when splitting an assembly is an overkill? P.S I guess there are other overheads to assembly splitting, aside from the storage overhead. If anyone can point out these overheads, it would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Getting Runtime Assemblies in Silverlight 3

    - by WoutervD
    Hello, I am currently writing a framework dll which has an AssemblyHelper. This helper stores Runtime and UserAdded assemblies to easily instantiate new objects. The .NET part of the framework uses: AppDomain MyDomain = AppDomain.CurrentDomain; Assembly[] AssembliesLoaded = MyDomain.GetAssemblies(); _runtimeAssemblies = AssembliesLoaded; This gets me all the assemblies I need. But the problem is I can't use this with Silverlight and I have no idea what to use now. Currently I am using: Assembly[] AssembliesLoaded = {Assembly.GetCallingAssembly()}; But this only adds the Assembly of my framework and not the one of the application or any other runtime assembly. What should I use? please help! Thanks in advance, Wouter

    Read the article

  • Versioning issues with assemblies

    - by devoured elysium
    Let's assume I have two assemblies: MyExecutable.dll version 1.0.0 MyClassLibrary.dll version 1.0.0 Now, MyExecutable.dll currently uses MyClassLibrary.dll's classes and methods (which include some algorithms). Most of those algorithms were made on the run, being that later I'll want to refine them if needed. This means, I won't change the interface of those classes but the code itself will see some changes. The question at hand is, MyExecutable.dll will be expecting MyClassLibrary.dll 1.0.0 and I'll want it to use version 1.0.1 (or something like that). I don't want to have to recompile MyExecutable.dll(because actually there might be more than just one executable using MyClassLibrary.dll). Is there a solution for this problem? I've heard about the GAC, but if possible I'd like to stay away from it. Thanks

    Read the article

  • TFS 2010 Build Custom Activity for Merging Assemblies

    - by Jakob Ehn
    *** The sample build process template discussed in this post is available for download from here: http://cid-ee034c9f620cd58d.office.live.com/self.aspx/BlogSamples/ILMerge.xaml ***   In my previous post I talked about library builds that we use to build and replicate dependencies between applications in TFS. This is typically used for common libraries and tools that several other application need to reference. When the libraries grow in size over time, so does the number of assemblies. So all solutions that uses the common library must reference all the necessary assemblies that they need, and if we for example do a refactoring and extract some code into a new assembly, all the clients must update their references to reflect these changes, otherwise it won’t compile. To improve on this, we use a tool from Microsoft Research called ILMerge (Download from here). It can be used to merge several assemblies into one assembly that contains all types. If you haven’t used this tool before, you should check it out. Previously I have implemented this in builds using a simple batch file that contains the full command, something like this: "%ProgramFiles(x86)%\microsoft\ilmerge\ilmerge.exe" /target:library /attr:ClassLibrary1.bl.dll /out:MyNewLibrary.dll ClassLibrary1.dll ClassLibrar2.dll ClassLibrary3.dll This merges 3 assemblies (ClassLibrary1, 2 and 3) into a new assembly called MyNewLibrary.dll. It will copy the attributes (file version, product version etc..) from ClassLibrary1.dll, using the /attr switch. For more info on ILMerge command line tool, see the above link. This approach works, but requires a little bit too much knowledge for the developers creating builds, therefor I have implemented a custom activity that wraps the use of ILMerge. This makes it much simpler to setup a new build definition and have the build automatically do the merging. The usage of the activity is then implemented as part of the Library Build process template mentioned in the previous post. For this article I have just created a simple build process template that only performs the ILMerge operation.   Below is the code for the custom activity. To make it compile, you need to reference the ILMerge.exe assembly. /// <summary> /// Activity for merging a list of assembies into one, using ILMerge /// </summary> public sealed class ILMergeActivity : BaseCodeActivity { /// <summary> /// A list of file paths to the assemblies that should be merged /// </summary> [RequiredArgument] public InArgument<IEnumerable<string>> InputAssemblies { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Full path to the generated assembly /// </summary> [RequiredArgument] public InArgument<string> OutputFile { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Which input assembly that the attibutes for the generated assembly should be copied from. /// Optional. If not specified, the first input assembly will be used /// </summary> public InArgument<string> AttributeFile { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Kind of assembly to generate, dll or exe /// </summary> public InArgument<TargetKindEnum> TargetKind { get; set; } // If your activity returns a value, derive from CodeActivity<TResult> // and return the value from the Execute method. protected override void Execute(CodeActivityContext context) { string message = InputAssemblies.Get(context).Aggregate("", (current, assembly) => current + (assembly + " ")); TrackMessage(context, "Merging " + message + " into " + OutputFile.Get(context)); ILMerge m = new ILMerge(); m.SetInputAssemblies(InputAssemblies.Get(context).ToArray()); m.TargetKind = TargetKind.Get(context) == TargetKindEnum.Dll ? ILMerge.Kind.Dll : ILMerge.Kind.Exe; m.OutputFile = OutputFile.Get(context); m.AttributeFile = !String.IsNullOrEmpty(AttributeFile.Get(context)) ? AttributeFile.Get(context) : InputAssemblies.Get(context).First(); m.SetTargetPlatform(RuntimeEnvironment.GetSystemVersion().Substring(0,2), RuntimeEnvironment.GetRuntimeDirectory()); m.Merge(); TrackMessage(context, "Generated " + m.OutputFile); } } [Browsable(true)] public enum TargetKindEnum { Dll, Exe } NB: The activity inherits from a BaseCodeActivity class which is an internal helper class which contains some methods and properties useful for moste custom activities. In this case, it uses the TrackeMessage method for writing to the build log. You either need to remove the TrackMessage method calls, or implement this yourself (which is not very hard… ) The custom activity has the following input arguments: InputAssemblies A list with the (full) paths to the assemblies to merge OutputFile The name of the resulting merged assembly AttributeFile Which assembly to use as the template for the attribute of the merged assembly. This argument is optional and if left blank, the first assembly in the input list is used TargetKind Decides what type of assembly to create, can be either a dll or an exe Of course, there are more switches to the ILMerge.exe, and these can be exposed as input arguments as well if you need it. To show how the custom activity can be used, I have attached a build process template (see link at the top of this post) that merges the output of the projects being built (CommonLibrary.dll and CommonLibrary2.dll) into a merged assembly (NewLibrary.dll). The build process template has the following custom process parameters:   The Assemblies To Merge argument is passed into a FindMatchingFiles activity to located all assemblies that are located in the BinariesDirectory folder after the compilation has been performed by Team Build. Here is the complete sequence of activities that performs the merge operation. It is located at the end of the Try, Compile, Test and Associate… sequence: It splits the AssembliesToMerge parameter and appends the full path (using the BinariesDirectory variable) and then enumerates the matching files using the FindMatchingFiles activity. When running the build, you can see that it merges two assemblies into a new one:     And the merged assembly (and associated pdb file) is copied to the drop location together with the rest of the assemblies:

    Read the article

  • .NET substitute dependent assemblies without recompiling?

    - by RK
    I have a question about how the .NET framework (2.0) resolves dependent assemblies. We're currently involved in a bit of a rewrite of a large ASP.NET application and various satellite executables. There are also some nagging problems with our foundation classes that we developed a new API to solve. So far this is a normal, albeit wide-reaching, update. Our heirarchy is: ASP.NET (aspx) business logic (DLLs) foundation classes (DLLs) So ASP.NET doesn't throw a fit, some of the DLLs (specifically the foundation classes) have a redirection layer that contains the old namespaces/functions and forwards them to the new API. When we replaced the DLLs, ASP.NET picked them up fine (probably because it triggered a recompile). Precompiled applications don't though, even though the same namespaces and classes are in both sets of DLLs. Even when the file is renamed, it complains about the assemblyname attribute being different (which it has to be by necessity). I know you can redirect to differnet versions of the same assembly, but is there any way to direct to a completely different assembly? The alternatives are to recompile the applications (don't really want to because the applications themselves haven't changed) or recompile the old foundation DLL with stubs refering to the new foundation DLL (the new dummy DLL is file system clutter).

    Read the article

  • NDepend: How to not display 'tier' assemblies in dependency graph?

    - by Edward Buatois
    I was able to do this in an earlier version of nDepend by going to tools-options and setting which assemblies would be part of the analysis (and ignore the rest). The latest version of the trial version of nDepend lets me set it, but it seems to ignore the setting and always analyze all assemblies whether I want it to or not. I tried to delete the "tier" assemblies by moving them over to the "application assemblies" list, but when I delete them out of there, they just get added back to the "tier" list, which I can't ignore. I don't want my dependency graph to contain assemblies like "system," "system.xml," and "system.serialization!" I want only MY assemblies in the dependency graph! Or is that a paid-version feature now? Is there a way to do what I'm talking about?

    Read the article

  • Using PreApplicationStartMethod for ASP.NET 4.0 Application to Initialize assemblies

    - by ChrisD
    Sometimes your ASP.NET application needs to hook up some code before even the Application is started. Assemblies supports a custom attribute called PreApplicationStartMethod which can be applied to any assembly that should be loaded to your ASP.NET application, and the ASP.NET engine will call the method you specify within it before actually running any of code defined in the application. Lets discuss how to use it using Steps : 1. Add an assembly to an application and add this custom attribute to the AssemblyInfo.cs. Remember, the method you speicify for initialize should be public static void method without any argument. Lets define a method Initialize. You need to write : [assembly:PreApplicationStartMethod(typeof(MyInitializer.InitializeType), "InitializeApp")] 2. After you define this to an assembly you need to add some code inside InitializeType.InitializeApp method within the assembly. public static class InitializeType {     public static void InitializeApp()     {           // Initialize application     } } 3. You must reference this class library so that when the application starts and ASP.NET starts loading the dependent assemblies, it will call the method InitializeApp automatically. Warning Even though you can use this attribute easily, you should be aware that you can define these kind of method in all of your assemblies that you reference, but there is no guarantee in what order each of the method to be called. Hence it is recommended to define this method to be isolated and without side effect of other dependent assemblies. The method InitializeApp will be called way before the Application_start event or even before the App_code is compiled. This attribute is mainly used to write code for registering assemblies or build providers. Read Documentation I hope this post would come helpful.

    Read the article

  • How to resolve conflicting assemblies in .Net?

    - by Amitabh
    In my web application I am using NHibernate.dll. This has a dependency on folowing assembly. 'Antlr3.Runtime, Version=3.1.0.39271, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=3a9cab8f8d22bfb7' Now in the same project for another requirement I have to introduce Antlr3.StringTemplate.dll. Which has a dependency on another version of the above assembly. If I use the version of Antlr3.Runtime.dll which satisfies NHibernate , Antlr3.StringTemplate starts complaining and vice-versa. How to resolve a situation like this?

    Read the article

  • Performance of .NET ILMerged assemblies

    - by matt
    I have two .NET libraries: "Foo.Bar" and "Foo.Baz". "Foo.Bar" is self-contained, while "Foo.Baz" references "Foo.Bar". Assuming I do the following: Use ILMerge to merge "Foo.Bar.dll" with "Foo.Baz.dll" into "Foo1.dll". Create a new solution containing the entirity of both "Foo.Bar" and "Foo.Baz" (since I have access to their source code), and compile this into "Foo2.dll". Will there be any differences in the performance of Foo1.dll and Foo2.dll when using their functionality from an external project? If so, how significant is this performance difference, and is it a once-off (on load?) or ongoing difference? Are there any other pros or cons with either approach?

    Read the article

  • How do I relocate assemblies from a deployment project without breaking application references?

    - by James
    Hi, I have recently refactored a lot of my applications existing code and I am now looking at tidying up the deployment side of things. The existing installer application installs everything in the application folder (with the exclusion of a couple of config files which are located in a sub folder). However, I have multiple applications which all use some common assemblies and my goal is to relocate a these particular assemblies to the "Common Files" folder in the program files directory. NB: I have read a lot about the GAC but I have no experience with it and also read a few horror stories, so trying to get a simple solution for the time being. I managed to get the assemblies installed into the Common Files folder, however, as a result (typical I.T.) I have broken my app! If I copy the assemblies back into the application folder it works fine so the problem is obviously to do with how my app is referencing the assemblies. To get the installer to install the assemblies into the Common Files folder I just updated the Folder property of each assembly in the Detected Dependencies list. My thoughts were when I did that the installer would somehow update my application to tell it to look in that folder for them but that doens't appear to be the case. What exactly am I doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Clarification required re use of .NET Assemblies in GAC - Use to use Globally?

    - by Cognize
    Hi, I've done much reading and experimentation today regarding sigining of assemblies, and their installation into the GAC via various methods (mscorcfg.msc / drag and drop). What I thought, was that once a file was in the GAC, you did not need to make references from projects in Visual studio. I know that you CAN make references via the usual Add Reference, Browse etc, but I thought it was automatic. Testing proves this not to be the case. I came across a forum post looking to achieve the same outcome that suggested adding to the machine.config file under system.web as below. This did not work, it in fact broke visual studio until I removed it. <assemblies> <add assembly="Blah.Framework.Logging, Version=1.0.3806.25580, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=0beed4b631ebc3cd" /> </assemblies> What I want to know, is am I right in my assumed use of assemblies in the GAC, and is there a way of making them globally available?

    Read the article

  • MS Ajax Libraries and Configured Assemblies

    - by smehaffie
    Use Case You have a brand new IIS servers that has .Net 3.5 installed and are migrating sites to the new servers.  In the process of migrating sites you come across some sites that get an error about the version of AJAX libraries being references in the web.config.  In the web.config all the entries reference 1.0.61025.0, but the older version of the AJAX libraries are not installed on the new servers, only the latest version is installed that comes with .Net 3.5.  So what are the options to fix this issue. Solutions 1) Install the older version of the AJAX Libraries: Although this works, IMO it is never a great idea to install an older version of a library after a newer version has been installed.  Plus, if all new application use the latest versions, is it worth the effort of installing the older version for a few legacy applications? 2) Update the web.config files so all references use latest version (3.5.0.0):  This option is very time consuming and error prone. In addition, you will also have to update any pages where there is a register tag for the older libraries as well.  This would require you to redeploy any application that have this issue. 3) Use the Configured Assembly capabilities of .Net (aka: Assembly Bindings) to make any application that uses the older AJAX libraries to use the new AJAX libraries.  IMO, this is the easiest, quickest and least invasive way to fix the issue.  Below are the steps to implement this fix. Solution #3 Do the following steps on the IIS servers that the issue is occurring.  The 2 assemblies that need assemblies bindings created are: System.Web.Extension & System.Web.Extensions.Design 1) Go to Start - > All Program -> Administrative Tools -> Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Configuration. 2) Right click on "Configured Assemblies" to view list of configured assemblies. 3) Left Click on right pane to bring up menu and choose "Add". 4) Make sure "Choose and assembly from the assembly cache is checked" and click the "Choose Assembly" button. 5) Choose System.Web.Extension (does not matter what version). 6) Click the "Finish" button. 7) Binding Policy Tab      - Enter Requested Version = 1.0.61025.0      - Enter New Version = 3.5.0.0 8) Repeat steps 2-7 for the System.Web.Extensions.Design assembly. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Note: If "Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Configuration does not exist under Admin tools use mmc to access it (see below) 1) Start -> Run -> Enter MMC 2) File - > Add/Remove Snap-In then Click "Add" button 3) Choose ".Net 2.0 Configuration" then click "Add" button and then the "Close" Button. 4) On "Add/Remove Snapin" windows click the "OK" Button. 5) Expand the tree on the right and you can start following the directions above for adding the configured assemblies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Read the article

  • BizTalk 2009 Orchestration Fails to Find References on External Assemblies

    - by Shawn Cicoria
    If you’re developing BizTalk 2009 solutions (Orchestrations) and you’ve split your schemas out into alternative assemblies (projects) – sometimes you’ll get odd not found issues with some (if not all) of the types in those referenced assemblies.  You can try everything – recompile, de-gac, re-gac, – doesn’t matter. Well there’s a hotfix for this: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/977428/en-us FIX: You experience various problems when you develop a BizTalk project that references another BizTalk project in Visual Studio on a computer that is running BizTalk Server 2009

    Read the article

  • How to exclude copy local referenced assemblies from a VSIX

    - by Daniel Cazzulino
    When you add library references to project that are not reference assemblies or installed in the GAC, Visual Studio defaults to setting Copy Local to True: If, however, those dependencies are distributed by some other means (i.e. another extension, or are part of VS private assemblies, or whatever) and you want to avoid including them in your VSIX, you can add the following property to the project file: &lt;PropertyGroup&gt; ... &lt;IncludeCopyLocalReferencesInVSIXContainer&gt;false&lt;/IncludeCopyLocalReferencesInVSIXContainer&gt;Read full article

    Read the article

  • Dynamically loading Assemblies to reduce Runtime Depencies

    - by Rick Strahl
    I've been working on a request to the West Wind Application Configuration library to add JSON support. The config library is a very easy to use code-first approach to configuration: You create a class that holds the configuration data that inherits from a base configuration class, and then assign a persistence provider at runtime that determines where and how the configuration data is store. Currently the library supports .NET Configuration stores (web.config/app.config), XML files, SQL records and string storage.About once a week somebody asks me about JSON support and I've deflected this question for the longest time because frankly I think that JSON as a configuration store doesn't really buy a heck of a lot over XML. Both formats require the user to perform some fixup of the plain configuration data - in XML into XML tags, with JSON using JSON delimiters for properties and property formatting rules. Sure JSON is a little less verbose and maybe a little easier to read if you have hierarchical data, but overall the differences are pretty minor in my opinion. And yet - the requests keep rolling in.Hard Link Issues in a Component LibraryAnother reason I've been hesitant is that I really didn't want to pull in a dependency on an external JSON library - in this case JSON.NET - into the core library. If you're not using JSON.NET elsewhere I don't want a user to have to require a hard dependency on JSON.NET unless they want to use the JSON feature. JSON.NET is also sensitive to versions and doesn't play nice with multiple versions when hard linked. For example, when you have a reference to V4.4 in your project but the host application has a reference to version 4.5 you can run into assembly load problems. NuGet's Update-Package can solve some of this *if* you can recompile, but that's not ideal for a component that's supposed to be just plug and play. This is no criticism of JSON.NET - this really applies to any dependency that might change.  So hard linking the DLL can be problematic for a number reasons, but the primary reason is to not force loading of JSON.NET unless you actually need it when you use the JSON configuration features of the library.Enter Dynamic LoadingSo rather than adding an assembly reference to the project, I decided that it would be better to dynamically load the DLL at runtime and then use dynamic typing to access various classes. This allows me to run without a hard assembly reference and allows more flexibility with version number differences now and in the future.But there are also a couple of downsides:No assembly reference means only dynamic access - no compiler type checking or IntellisenseRequirement for the host application to have reference to JSON.NET or else get runtime errorsThe former is minor, but the latter can be problematic. Runtime errors are always painful, but in this case I'm willing to live with this. If you want to use JSON configuration settings JSON.NET needs to be loaded in the project. If this is a Web project, it'll likely be there already.So there are a few things that are needed to make this work:Dynamically create an instance and optionally attempt to load an Assembly (if not loaded)Load types into dynamic variablesUse Reflection for a few tasks like statics/enumsThe dynamic keyword in C# makes the formerly most difficult Reflection part - method calls and property assignments - fairly painless. But as cool as dynamic is it doesn't handle all aspects of Reflection. Specifically it doesn't deal with object activation, truly dynamic (string based) member activation or accessing of non instance members, so there's still a little bit of work left to do with Reflection.Dynamic Object InstantiationThe first step in getting the process rolling is to instantiate the type you need to work with. This might be a two step process - loading the instance from a string value, since we don't have a hard type reference and potentially having to load the assembly. Although the host project might have a reference to JSON.NET, that instance might have not been loaded yet since it hasn't been accessed yet. In ASP.NET this won't be a problem, since ASP.NET preloads all referenced assemblies on AppDomain startup, but in other executable project, assemblies are just in time loaded only when they are accessed.Instantiating a type is a two step process: Finding the type reference and then activating it. Here's the generic code out of my ReflectionUtils library I use for this:/// <summary> /// Creates an instance of a type based on a string. Assumes that the type's /// </summary> /// <param name="typeName">Common name of the type</param> /// <param name="args">Any constructor parameters</param> /// <returns></returns> public static object CreateInstanceFromString(string typeName, params object[] args) { object instance = null; Type type = null; try { type = GetTypeFromName(typeName); if (type == null) return null; instance = Activator.CreateInstance(type, args); } catch { return null; } return instance; } /// <summary> /// Helper routine that looks up a type name and tries to retrieve the /// full type reference in the actively executing assemblies. /// </summary> /// <param name="typeName"></param> /// <returns></returns> public static Type GetTypeFromName(string typeName) { Type type = null; // Let default name binding find it type = Type.GetType(typeName, false); if (type != null) return type; // look through assembly list var assemblies = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies(); // try to find manually foreach (Assembly asm in assemblies) { type = asm.GetType(typeName, false); if (type != null) break; } return type; } To use this for loading JSON.NET I have a small factory function that instantiates JSON.NET and sets a bunch of configuration settings on the generated object. The startup code also looks for failure and tries loading up the assembly when it fails since that's the main reason the load would fail. Finally it also caches the loaded instance for reuse (according to James the JSON.NET instance is thread safe and quite a bit faster when cached). Here's what the factory function looks like in JsonSerializationUtils:/// <summary> /// Dynamically creates an instance of JSON.NET /// </summary> /// <param name="throwExceptions">If true throws exceptions otherwise returns null</param> /// <returns>Dynamic JsonSerializer instance</returns> public static dynamic CreateJsonNet(bool throwExceptions = true) { if (JsonNet != null) return JsonNet; lock (SyncLock) { if (JsonNet != null) return JsonNet; // Try to create instance dynamic json = ReflectionUtils.CreateInstanceFromString("Newtonsoft.Json.JsonSerializer"); if (json == null) { try { var ass = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.Load("Newtonsoft.Json"); json = ReflectionUtils.CreateInstanceFromString("Newtonsoft.Json.JsonSerializer"); } catch (Exception ex) { if (throwExceptions) throw; return null; } } if (json == null) return null; json.ReferenceLoopHandling = (dynamic) ReflectionUtils.GetStaticProperty("Newtonsoft.Json.ReferenceLoopHandling", "Ignore"); // Enums as strings in JSON dynamic enumConverter = ReflectionUtils.CreateInstanceFromString("Newtonsoft.Json.Converters.StringEnumConverter"); json.Converters.Add(enumConverter); JsonNet = json; } return JsonNet; }This code's purpose is to return a fully configured JsonSerializer instance. As you can see the code tries to create an instance and when it fails tries to load the assembly, and then re-tries loading.Once the instance is loaded some configuration occurs on it. Specifically I set the ReferenceLoopHandling option to not blow up immediately when circular references are encountered. There are a host of other small config setting that might be useful to set, but the default seem to be good enough in recent versions. Note that I'm setting ReferenceLoopHandling which requires an Enum value to be set. There's no real easy way (short of using the cardinal numeric value) to set a property or pass parameters from static values or enums. This means I still need to use Reflection to make this work. I'm using the same ReflectionUtils class I previously used to handle this for me. The function looks up the type and then uses Type.InvokeMember() to read the static property.Another feature I need is have Enum values serialized as strings rather than numeric values which is the default. To do this I can use the StringEnumConverter to convert enums to strings by adding it to the Converters collection.As you can see there's still a bit of Reflection to be done even in C# 4+ with dynamic, but with a few helpers this process is relatively painless.Doing the actual JSON ConversionFinally I need to actually do my JSON conversions. For the Utility class I need serialization that works for both strings and files so I created four methods that handle these tasks two each for serialization and deserialization for string and file.Here's what the File Serialization looks like:/// <summary> /// Serializes an object instance to a JSON file. /// </summary> /// <param name="value">the value to serialize</param> /// <param name="fileName">Full path to the file to write out with JSON.</param> /// <param name="throwExceptions">Determines whether exceptions are thrown or false is returned</param> /// <param name="formatJsonOutput">if true pretty-formats the JSON with line breaks</param> /// <returns>true or false</returns> public static bool SerializeToFile(object value, string fileName, bool throwExceptions = false, bool formatJsonOutput = false) { dynamic writer = null; FileStream fs = null; try { Type type = value.GetType(); var json = CreateJsonNet(throwExceptions); if (json == null) return false; fs = new FileStream(fileName, FileMode.Create); var sw = new StreamWriter(fs, Encoding.UTF8); writer = Activator.CreateInstance(JsonTextWriterType, sw); if (formatJsonOutput) writer.Formatting = (dynamic)Enum.Parse(FormattingType, "Indented"); writer.QuoteChar = '"'; json.Serialize(writer, value); } catch (Exception ex) { Debug.WriteLine("JsonSerializer Serialize error: " + ex.Message); if (throwExceptions) throw; return false; } finally { if (writer != null) writer.Close(); if (fs != null) fs.Close(); } return true; }You can see more of the dynamic invocation in this code. First I grab the dynamic JsonSerializer instance using the CreateJsonNet() method shown earlier which returns a dynamic. I then create a JsonTextWriter and configure a couple of enum settings on it, and then call Serialize() on the serializer instance with the JsonTextWriter that writes the output to disk. Although this code is dynamic it's still fairly short and readable.For full circle operation here's the DeserializeFromFile() version:/// <summary> /// Deserializes an object from file and returns a reference. /// </summary> /// <param name="fileName">name of the file to serialize to</param> /// <param name="objectType">The Type of the object. Use typeof(yourobject class)</param> /// <param name="binarySerialization">determines whether we use Xml or Binary serialization</param> /// <param name="throwExceptions">determines whether failure will throw rather than return null on failure</param> /// <returns>Instance of the deserialized object or null. Must be cast to your object type</returns> public static object DeserializeFromFile(string fileName, Type objectType, bool throwExceptions = false) { dynamic json = CreateJsonNet(throwExceptions); if (json == null) return null; object result = null; dynamic reader = null; FileStream fs = null; try { fs = new FileStream(fileName, FileMode.Open, FileAccess.Read); var sr = new StreamReader(fs, Encoding.UTF8); reader = Activator.CreateInstance(JsonTextReaderType, sr); result = json.Deserialize(reader, objectType); reader.Close(); } catch (Exception ex) { Debug.WriteLine("JsonNetSerialization Deserialization Error: " + ex.Message); if (throwExceptions) throw; return null; } finally { if (reader != null) reader.Close(); if (fs != null) fs.Close(); } return result; }This code is a little more compact since there are no prettifying options to set. Here JsonTextReader is created dynamically and it receives the output from the Deserialize() operation on the serializer.You can take a look at the full JsonSerializationUtils.cs file on GitHub to see the rest of the operations, but the string operations are very similar - the code is fairly repetitive.These generic serialization utilities isolate the dynamic serialization logic that has to deal with the dynamic nature of JSON.NET, and any code that uses these functions is none the wiser that JSON.NET is dynamically loaded.Using the JsonSerializationUtils WrapperThe final consumer of the SerializationUtils wrapper is an actual ConfigurationProvider, that is responsible for handling reading and writing JSON values to and from files. The provider is simple a small wrapper around the SerializationUtils component and there's very little code to make this work now:The whole provider looks like this:/// <summary> /// Reads and Writes configuration settings in .NET config files and /// sections. Allows reading and writing to default or external files /// and specification of the configuration section that settings are /// applied to. /// </summary> public class JsonFileConfigurationProvider<TAppConfiguration> : ConfigurationProviderBase<TAppConfiguration> where TAppConfiguration: AppConfiguration, new() { /// <summary> /// Optional - the Configuration file where configuration settings are /// stored in. If not specified uses the default Configuration Manager /// and its default store. /// </summary> public string JsonConfigurationFile { get { return _JsonConfigurationFile; } set { _JsonConfigurationFile = value; } } private string _JsonConfigurationFile = string.Empty; public override bool Read(AppConfiguration config) { var newConfig = JsonSerializationUtils.DeserializeFromFile(JsonConfigurationFile, typeof(TAppConfiguration)) as TAppConfiguration; if (newConfig == null) { if(Write(config)) return true; return false; } DecryptFields(newConfig); DataUtils.CopyObjectData(newConfig, config, "Provider,ErrorMessage"); return true; } /// <summary> /// Return /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TAppConfig"></typeparam> /// <returns></returns> public override TAppConfig Read<TAppConfig>() { var result = JsonSerializationUtils.DeserializeFromFile(JsonConfigurationFile, typeof(TAppConfig)) as TAppConfig; if (result != null) DecryptFields(result); return result; } /// <summary> /// Write configuration to XmlConfigurationFile location /// </summary> /// <param name="config"></param> /// <returns></returns> public override bool Write(AppConfiguration config) { EncryptFields(config); bool result = JsonSerializationUtils.SerializeToFile(config, JsonConfigurationFile,false,true); // Have to decrypt again to make sure the properties are readable afterwards DecryptFields(config); return result; } }This incidentally demonstrates how easy it is to create a new provider for the West Wind Application Configuration component. Simply implementing 3 methods will do in most cases.Note this code doesn't have any dynamic dependencies - all that's abstracted away in the JsonSerializationUtils(). From here on, serializing JSON is just a matter of calling the static methods on the SerializationUtils class.Already, there are several other places in some other tools where I use JSON serialization this is coming in very handy. With a couple of lines of code I was able to add JSON.NET support to an older AJAX library that I use replacing quite a bit of code that was previously in use. And for any other manual JSON operations (in a couple of apps I use JSON Serialization for 'blob' like document storage) this is also going to be handy.Performance?Some of you might be thinking that using dynamic and Reflection can't be good for performance. And you'd be right… In performing some informal testing it looks like the performance of the native code is nearly twice as fast as the dynamic code. Most of the slowness is attributable to type lookups. To test I created a native class that uses an actual reference to JSON.NET and performance was consistently around 85-90% faster with the referenced code. That being said though - I serialized 10,000 objects in 80ms vs. 45ms so this isn't hardly slouchy. For the configuration component speed is not that important because both read and write operations typically happen once on first access and then every once in a while. But for other operations - say a serializer trying to handle AJAX requests on a Web Server one would be well served to create a hard dependency.Dynamic Loading - Worth it?On occasion dynamic loading makes sense. But there's a price to be paid in added code complexity and a performance hit. But for some operations that are not pivotal to a component or application and only used under certain circumstances dynamic loading can be beneficial to avoid having to ship extra files and loading down distributions. These days when you create new projects in Visual Studio with 30 assemblies before you even add your own code, trying to keep file counts under control seems a good idea. It's not the kind of thing you do on a regular basis, but when needed it can be a useful tool. Hopefully some of you find this information useful…© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2013Posted in .NET  C#   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >