Official VSL feedback and suggestions thread

Hot Topic

Incorrect Log on Parameters... using DataSet as report source
DLINQ Designer for Express editions
Getting an Excell::* pointer form a com component
DSL and GAT demo
Create a diagram by using custom code
VSTO 2005 beta2 with .NET 2003??
An existing PeerNode exists for this Uri with a conflicting configuration
Debugger not stepping into my program
Class Diagrams
Get all bindings on a page?

Visual Studio

How does Dlinq support complex dynamic queries?
Differences in syntax support between LINQ and DLINQ
I Can’t seem to clone a StackPanel, how is that done?
Cecil project from Mono : better than Linq ?
Proxies for Java Class
Visual Studio 2005 Beta 2 Uninstall error.
Default browser for Visual Studio
Send email using Outlook
Insert Word field...programmatically?
Why the reverse German-like syntax?

Official VSL feedback and suggestions thread

The Visual Studio Library (VSL) is a new addition to the Visual Studio SDK 2005-10 (VS SDK), and was not previously available in the VSIP SDK.  VSL is a C++ source library, primarily targeting the Visual Studio Platform, which extends the Active Template Library (ATL).  A Power Point presentation given at the VSIP dev lab can be be found here.

< xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Thus far the contents of VSL have been solely driven by the needs of the four new C++ reference samples included in the VS SDK, so many classes are not as fully featured as is possible.  Content will continue to be added to VSL, as needed by the C++ samples; however, content can also be added based on community needs.  Included in the VSL source are some comments tagged with FUTURE, which illustrate some possible additions, but we would very much like to get feedback from the community on what is most needed.

 

This is the official thread for the discussion of the future direction of VSL.  Please limit your posts on this thread to the discussion of suggestions for additions and modifications to VSL.  Off-topic posts will be moved or deleted.  Questions, problems, and issues relating to VSL should be posted on new threads on this forum, so they can be individually addressed and answered.

 

It is encouraged to read over the suggestions of others and comment on suggestions that you would also like to see added, as this will help us prioritize work items.

 

We will post back onto this thread for clarification when necessary as well as posting the VSL work we plan to do and what its priority is.

 

Do not post any code, other then unmodified VSL or VS SDK sample code.  Posting any other code will result in the post being immediately deleted to avoid legal issues regarding intellectual property.

 

Please be sure you looking at VSL source from the Visual Studio SDK 2005-10 RTM release or later.  Referencing older source will likely cause confusion.

 

The VSL headers are located at <VS SDK Install Root>\VisualStudioIntegration\Common\Source\CPP\VSL\Include.  An easy way to browse them all in the Visual Studio IDE is to open the solution located at <VS SDK Install Root>\VisualStudioIntegration\Common\Source\CPP\VSL\UnitTest\VSLUnitTest.sln and browse to the “Header Files” folder under the VSLIncludes project.

 

It should be noted that the mock object infrastructure included in VSL is in need of some redesign and fair bit of refactoring (some changes will be breaking).  A separate post will added to this thread to detail the current plans for the mock object infrastructure provided in VSL.

This thread will remain sticky for 3 months.

Answer this question

Official VSL feedback and suggestions thread

  • Jaime Atiles

    The December CTP of the VS SDK (NOTE - this hasn't been posted yet, but will be shortly) includes mock interfaces for nearly all Visual Studio Platform interfaces, as well as numerous changes to the VSL infrastructure for mock objects.  The changes to the VSL infrastructure where necessitated in part by the development of the mock interfaces, and in part to make ease the utilization of the mock interfaces in unit tests.< xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

     

    The breaking changes are:

    • The class MockBase is no longer a template class.
    • The static method MockBase::SetUnitTestBase(const UnitTestBase& rUnitTestBase) was removed.  The static method UnitTestBase::SetUnitTestBase(const UnitTestBase& rUnitTestBase) should be utilized instead.
    • The static method MockBase::GetCurrentUnitTestBase() was removed.  The static method UnitTestBase::GetCurrentUnitTestBase() should be utilized instead.
    • The static method MockBase::CheckValidString(const wchar_t * const pszValid, const wchar_t * const pszParam) was renamed to CheckValidStringW (and CheckValidStringA was added as well).
    • The static method MockBase::CheckValidPointer now has two template arguments instead of one.  This is only breaking if the argument is explicitly specified, which is unnecessary, as the compiler can infer the template argument from what is passed into the method.
    • The macro VSL_DECLARE_VALIDVALUES(type) was removed.  The macros VSL_DEFINE_MOCK_METHOD_NOARGS_NORETURN(methodName), VSL_DEFINE_MOCK_METHOD(methodName), and VSL_DEFINE_MOCK_METHOD_NOARGS(methodName) should be utilized instead.
    • The macro VSL_CHECK_VALIDSTRING was renamed VSL_CHECK_VALIDVALUE_STRING.
    • The macro VSL_CHECK_VALIDPOINTER was renamed VSL_CHECK_VALIDPOINTER.
    • The macro VSL_RETURN_VALIDVALUES_HR() was removed.  The macro VSL_RETURN_VALIDVALUES() should be utilized instead.
    • The class IVsShellFixedVSPropertySet was removed.  IVsShellMockImpl should be utilized instead.

    The samples VisualStudioIntegration\Samples\IDE\CPP\Reference.MenuAndCommands and VisualStudioIntegration\Samples\IDE\CPP\Reference.Services provide examples of unit tests, which are complete, and make use of the new mock interfaces and the new macros that ease the use of the new mock interfaces.

     

    The sample VisualStudioIntegration\Samples\IDE\CPP\Reference.ToolWindow\UnitTest has more complex unit testing needs then other two samples, and some of this illustrated currently, but the unit test is not yet complete.

  • Aqiqul

    Hi Josh

    I have started looking at implementing a new VSPackage, and for various reasons want to implement it in C++

    I stumbled - and that is the right word - across just a hint about VSL in the MSDN VS SDK documentation, and have since been trying to find any other documentation about it. I did stumble across the deep dive ppt - Google found it for me once I threw some of the VSL identifiers at it

    My biggest handicaps to using the VSL are (a) this lack of documentation, and (b) I can not discern how committed Microsoft is to it



  • McGanahan Skejellyfetti

    Thus far, we have not gotten any feedback on VSL, so in an effort to generate some interest, I've started blogging about VSL in more detail. Here is blog post on what VSL is, and here is one on it's guiding principles.

  • element__

    Hi Josh,

    I think VSL is a really good work I was checking the templates and they are really a high quality work. Anyway from the begining I decided to not use these templates because I didn't find a reason I didn’t find a use case where using VSL save my time over using for example MPF or directly interop interfaces.

    In my Case I have 3 unmanaged packages and a lot of managed packages, so What should I do with my 3 unmanaged packages I could try to start using VSL but I prefer invest my time migrating to managed packages because after I will have more productivity working in C# over C++.

    So really, I prefer Microsoft invest time improving the MPF over invest time on VSL.

    Best Regards,

    Gaston Milano



  • charles pratheepan

    I already have some things in C++/CLI and I consider it like a step forward but no the final step, for me the final step is having my code in C# obviously sometimes I can't do that but even when you have a easy access to framework classes in general you get involved in Marshaling parameters, and writing "^" is annoying ;)

    I known that even working with C# in some cases we have to deal with marshaling, and interop stuff, but the MPF is fighting with these cases and I consider it is the way to simplify the VS integration

    Best Regards



  • alamandra - MCP

    Gaston wrote:
    I prefer invest my time migrating to managed packages because after I will have more productivity working in C# over C++.

    Do consider yourself more productive working in C# versus just native C++ or both native C++ and C++/CLI (new with VS 2005, not the same as the Managed C++ extensions available in VS.Net and VS 2003)


  • Official VSL feedback and suggestions thread
Answer this question