How to enforce module boundaries in Java <= 8 - junit

I want to modularize a monolithic application by using Java modules (introduced by Project Jigsaw).
Unfortunately I'm currently stuck to use Java 8. I would like to build those modules (jar files) anyway, but without the feature of using a module-info.java file for declaring the dependencies and the exported API.
Some weeks ago I stumbled upon an API/framework which allows to define nearly the same things that you can do in a module-info.java file. It could be used in JUnit tests in order to enforce module's not to use the internal's of another module and that module's only can access modules they explicitly depend on.
Of course you do not have any assistence from the compiler or the IDE, but you can enforce the access by JUnit. Unfortunately I do not find the project which provides the API any more.
Can anyone help?
Btw. if there is another good approach beside a unit test, please let me know, too!

https://www.archunit.org/ is what I have been looking for.

Related

Creating hash value according to the HMAC-SHA512 method using PCL/MvvmCross

I'm trying to create a cross platform application using MVVMCross and portable class libraries, which interacts with an api and displays some data asynchronously.
Currently I am trying to generate a SHA512 hash value for a sign key that will be sent along to the api.
I am not exactly sure how I can implement the cryptology portion. I have tried using the SHA512 class, however it appears to be unavailable. I tried manually adding a reference to System.Security.Cryptology which didn't help.
I also tried additional packages on nuget such as SharpCrypt to see if they would help generate a hash value, however I see the error "the type or namespace name 'CryptSharp' could not be found" after adding the package from nuget.
I am targeting:
.Net Framework 4.5+
Windows Store apps
Silver light 5
Windows Phone 8
I'm quite a beginner so maybe I am missing something extremely obvious, any help or examples would be much appreciated.
Thanks!
I believe some of the crypto classes may also be available portably using the PCLContrib project - http://pclcontrib.codeplex.com - but I don't think this is yet available beyond Windows.
Where functionality isn't available portably, you can inject implementations into portable class libraries via an interface from each UI platform:
there's an example of this in the first part of N=31 in http://mvvmcross.blogspot.co.uk
there's a full introduction to MvvmCross dependency injection in https://github.com/MvvmCross/MvvmCross/wiki/Service-Location-and-Inversion-of-Control

Xamarin + JSON.Net

I'm having trouble understanding why the Newtonsoft JSON parser has to be device specific under Xamarin. I cannot seem to find any way to have the parser exist in a common, shared library. I'm using the Tasky Pro sample app. I can get the JSON.Net DLLs from the Xamarin store to work in the Android and iOS projects, however that makes no architecural sense. E.g., the SQLite stuff is all in a shared lib, as you'd expect - as one set of c# source files.
Ideally I'd like to just add some kind of reference to "Tasky.Core" and be able to serialize/deserialize JSON.
Is there any way to get JSON.Net to work in a shared library (across droid/ios/wp8)? The source is pretty huge to try to manage as linked files, if that's even possible...
If not, is there some alternative way of managing JSON that will work in this way?
You should be able to use the JSon.NET NuGet Package for this. The implementation is actually platform-specific [1], but NuGet will transparently take care of that for you and pick the correct one for you.
Note that you need Mono 3.2.6 and Xamarin.iOS 7.0.6 for this, which just hit the alpha channel this week, I have just fixed some critical bugs in this area. You should also upgrade the NuGet Add-In in Xamarin Studio to the latest version (0.8), which contains several PCL-related bug fixes.
Simply add the NuGet Add-In to Xamarin Studio if you have not done so already, then search for "JSon.NET", the add-in will automatically install the package and add the required library references for you.
[1] The NuGet package contains different .dll's for different target frameworks and then picks and references the best one for your project - so your application will only contain a single implementation, but an iOS app may use a different one than a desktop application.
Update 01/14/14:
NuGet packages usually contain different implementations - unfortunately, not all of them will work with Xamarin.iOS due to APIs such as Reflection.Emit or Full DLR that are not available on iOS.
If you look into the packages/Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8/lib/ directory, you'll see different sub-directories - each of these contain a different implementation and NuGet will use the one that best fits the current target framework. Unfortunately, NuGet does not always pick the right one :-(
For Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8, the "portable-net45+wp80+win8" implementation uses DLR features that are not available on iOS, the "portable-net40+sl4+wp7+win8" one is ok. So if you add the NuGet package to a PCL that's targeting for instance Profile136, you'll get the correct implementation.
There is no GUI to choose another implementation, but you can edit the .csproj file. Replace
<Reference Include="Newtonsoft.Json">
<HintPath>..\packages\Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8\lib\portable-net45+wp80+win8\Newtonsoft.Json.dll</HintPath>
</Reference>
with
<Reference Include="Newtonsoft.Json">
<HintPath>..\packages\Newtonsoft.Json.5.0.8\lib\portable-net40+sl4+wp7+win8\Newtonsoft.Json.dll</HintPath>
</Reference>
and it should work.
In general, when you're getting an error message about missing types after adding a new NuGet package, go to the corresponding package directory and grep -r for that symbol - chances are that there's a different implementation which does not use this type.
Hopefully, a more elegant solution will be available in the future, but that needs coordination with the NuGet team and package authors, so it'll take some time.
Just add it to Shared Library via NuGet. Actually, all your request/response tasks should be done in library. You should use JSON.Net to parse response.

Box-API: How can I add a strong name to a 3rd party assembly written for the .NET Portable Subset

I am trying to strongly name a 3rd party API that I have the code for but it's using a 3rd party DLL/NuGet Package that is also not strongly named and I'm having a lot of trouble.
I'm using the Box Windows SDK and the API was written in the .NET portable subset and supports .NET for Windows Store Apps, .NET Framework 4 and higher, SL4 and higher, and Windows Phone 7 and higher. Granted, I do not need all of these but I do need the .NET 4 and Silverlight versions. The API already works wonderfully and runs fine on its own. It would with my application also, if all my projects were unsigned but they aren't. We use strongly named assemblies for our Silverlight application in order to make use of application library caching.
Anyway, I have the source code for the API so I simply added my PFX file to the project to sign it. I then get an error that a dependency that this API is using called NitoAsnycEx.dll is not signed. I do not have the code for Nito.AsyncEx.dll but normally this isn't such a problem, more of an annoyance. So now I have an age-old problem of needing to take a 3rd party DLL of which I don't have code for and sign it with my PFX or another SNK file.
I can do either and normally I use one of the processes so wonderfully explained in this post by Ian Picknell: http://ianpicknell.blogspot.com/2009/12/adding-strong-name-to-third-party.html. So I have followed that process and the IL signing tools seem to sign the DLL just fine.
To make a long story shorter, let's use the simplest version of the signing process where I already have a simple SNK file ready to go. Basically, I do this:
I can run ILDASM to get the .il file for this 3rd party EXE:
ILDASM Nito.AsyncEx.dll /out:Nito.AsyncEx.il
I can then run ILASM to get the signed DLL:
ILASM Nito.AsyncEx.il /dll /resource=Nito.AsyncEx.res /key=NPSAssemblyKeyNoPassword.snk
It works great and I get this result:
Method Implementations (total): 118
Resolving local member refs: 0 -> 0 defs, 0 refs, 0 unresolved
Writing PE file
Signing file with strong name
Operation completed successfully
So now I have a signed DLL. I go back to my 3rd Party API code and remove the old reference to NitoAsyncEx.dll and put a new one to this. I try to compile and then I get an error like this:
Error 44 The base class or interface 'System.Object' in assembly 'System.Runtime, Version=1.5.11.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a' referenced by type 'Nito.AsyncEx.AsyncLock' could not be resolved r:\Data\GM\Source\GrantManagement\GrantManagement\3rd Party\Nito\Nito.AsyncEx.dll
I figure there is some problems using the portable .net library here but I'm not sure what it is. This same process normally works for me for Silverlight 4+ and Full .NET 4.5 framework libraries. Is there another ILASM or ILDASM set somewhere that will disassemble and reassemble the portable code correctly? Is this even possible?
I also tried to go and get the source code for the NitoAsyncEx.dll, which is open source btw, and compile it but that source code will not compile as it's missing some files. So currently I'm stuck with my integration of this API into my project and need a little assistance from any experts in the community.
Is there a way to sign this DLL correctly so we're not missing references to basic classes such as System.Object?
Is there a way to get around needing to sign this DLL at all and having it referenced from my projects?
UPDATED
The Box SDK has been updated and is now strong-named on nuget. This is thanks to the recent update to AsyncEx which strong-named the assembly.
As you mentioned, it's unfortunately out of our control that the NitoAsyncEx library is not strongly named. This library provides the ability to properly lock resources during an async/await call, and I do not believe there is a better alternative at the moment.
This being said, I may have a (hopefully temporary) workaround for you. I've downloaded the source from https://nitoasyncex.codeplex.com/ and was able to get it to compile. These are the steps I performed:
Removed the reference to MSBuild in the csproj
Copied the missing Dequeue.cs file from the packages folder
Resolved missing nuget references
Regenerated the AssemblyInfo.cs
Excluded the .tt template files from the project
Unloaded all other projects the SDK does not use
Here's the resulting solution:
https://cloud.box.com/s/7ikurtyajqmhq9p8q52x
I've successfully ran the resulting dll through the SDK's tests so hopefully this should cover what you need. I cannot guarantee the stability of this method, but having a working source should allow you to do any signing you need. From there, you should be able to drop the signed assembly into the SDK source and sign that assembly as well.

WIX InstallUtil/InstallUtilLib and Configuration File Deployment why is InstallUtil bad?

I often find the quote "InstallUtil.exe" is an ugly pattern or "Don't use InstallUtil.exe" and that I should use native WIX or Installation package patterns and I still don't understood why.
I stepped away from using InstallUtil to install a .NET service as I finally learnt that writing registry keys for such an action should be an un-install-able action - and I've come to terms with this as correct.
As I've been working through my WIX installer for a relatively complex product, I have found myself in need of creating or updating SQL Server databases, creating or updating IIS Applications and finally updating or creating configuration files.
Each of my components (features) are optional, but they all share the same configuration file. As my product uses unity, its important to note that this library contains strong support for reading/updating/removing components from the Unity Configuration block, therefore it seems fairly smart to me that I should take advantages of these blocks via Installation Components (i.e. InstallUtil) to create or update my configuration file at installation time.
Just to be clear here, my installer does not natively contain a configuration file for my application: at installation time, the installer has no idea as to the shape of it as its based on the features selected. Surely I should be embedding this knowledge into each of the modules that are to be deployed and not in the remit of the installer which is now a completely independent project? Wouldn't this break O-O principals even if we are talking about installation?
I'd really appreciate some guidance as to whether this is good practise or not? Am I reading 'InstallUtil' is bad for installing services, or is it that using 'InstallUtil' is bad full-stop? If so, what are my options for smart updating of configuration files?
The main reason for avoiding InstallUtil is that it runs outside of the installation transaction, so Windows Installer cannot keep track of what it's done.
I have used InstallUtil on a few occasions, when I just couldn't get Wix to do what I needed and didn't have time to write a custom action. In this case I called the InstallUtilLib version as I feel this is a cleaner approach.
I used the this blog as a guide as to how to achieve this.

How to design extensible software (plugin architecture)? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I need some resources that talk about how to design your software to be extensible, i.e. so that other people can write add-ons/plug-ins that adds functionality to it.
What do you recommend? Any books out there that discuss the subject?
I would prefer something that's short and to the point; a bit of theory and a bunch of concrete examples.
I'm not targeting a specific language, I want to be able to understand the core idea so that I can implement it in any language.
And for the same reason, I prefer not to do it using a framework that someone else built (unless the framework is not very high-level, i.e. doesn't hide too much), at the moment I only want to educate myself on the subject and experiment with various ways to implement it. Plus, a framework usually assumes user's knowledge about the subject.
UPDATE
I'm not asking about OOP or allowing my classes to be inherited. I'm talking about designing an application that will be deployed on a system, such that it can be extended by third-party add-ons AFTER its been deployed.
For example, Notepad++ has a plug-in architecture where you can place a .dll file in the plugins folder, and it adds functionality to the application that wasn't there, such as color-picking, or snippet insertion, or many other things (a wide range of functionality).
IF we're talking .NET, try Scripting .NET applications with VBScript over on CodeProject. Lots of concrete examples there.
Below are sites implementing various application extension techniques
ClearScript - Makes V8, VBScript and JScript available to .NET apps
CS-Script - The C# Script Engine
Plugin Architecture using C#
Opinio plugin architecture
Notes on the Eclipse Plug-in Architecture
Plug-in Architecture Framework for Beginners
Gecko plugin architecture
Fungimol plugin architecture
OSGI is a good practical example of a technical framework allowing to do what you are after.
The theory is here.
The (free!) book is there.
Extensibility and the ability to write plugin must deal with service lifecycle
adding / removing service/plugin on the spot
managing dependencies between services
managing states of services (declared, installed, started, stopped,...)
What is OSGI for ?
One of the main functions of a module is as a unit of deployment… something that we can either build or download and install to extend the functionality of our application.
You will find a good introduction here, on the central notion of service (which is related to your question, and which explain some problems around services, key component for extensibility).
Extract:
Why are services then so important if so many applications can be built without them? Well, services are the best known way to decouple software components from each other.
One of the most important aspects of services is that they significantly minimize class loading problems because they work with instances of objects, not with class names. Instances that are created by the provider, not the consumer. The reduction of the complexity is quite surprising
Not only do services minimize configuration, they also significantly reduce the number of shared packages.
Implement SOLID principles in your application.
1. Single responsibility principle: A class should have only a single responsibility (i.e. only one potential change in the software's specification should be able to affect the specification of the class
2.Open/closed principle: Software entities … should be open for extension, but closed for modification
3. Liskov substitution principle: Objects in a program should be replaceable with instances of their subtypes without altering the correctness of that program
4. Interface segregation principle: Many client-specific interfaces are better than one general-purpose interface
5. Dependency inversion principle: One should Depend upon Abstractions. Do not depend upon concretions
Stackoverflow questions:
Example of Single Responsibility Principle
Is the Open/Closed Principle a good idea?
What is the Liskov Substitution Principle?
Interface Segregation Principle- Program to an interface
What is the Dependency Inversion Principle and why is it important?
You try to reach two competing goals:
The components of your software must expose a lot of themselves, so they can be reused
The components of your software must expose very little of themselves, so they can be reused
Explanation: To encourage code reuse, you should be able to extend existing classes and call their methods. This isn't possible when the methods are declared "private" and the classes are "final" (and can't be extended). So to meet this goal, everything should be public and accessible. No private data or methods.
When you release the second version of your software, you will find that many of the ideas of version 1 were plain wrong. You need to change many interfaces or your code, method names, delete methods, break the API. If you do this, many people will turn away. So in order to be able to evolve your software, the components must not expose anything that is not absolutely necessary - at the cost of code reuse.
Example: I wanted to observe the position of the cursor (caret) in an SWT StyledText. The caret is not meant to be extended. If you do it, you'll find that the code contains checks like "is this class in the package org.eclipse.swt" and a lot of methods are private and final and whatnot. I had to copy about 28 classes out of SWT into my project just to implement this feature because everything is locked down.
SWT is a nice framework to use and hell to extend.
Of course there is the famous Open Closed Principle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open/closed_principle
Well it depends on the language.
In C/C++ I'm pretty sure there is a loadlibrary function that allows you to open a library at runtime and invoke it's exported functions. This is typically how it's done in C/C++.
In .NET, there is Reflection, which is offers similar (but more broad) to loadlibrary. There is also entire libraries built on Reflection like Managed Extension Framework, or Mono.Addins that does most of the heavy lifting for you already.
In Java, there is also Reflection. And there is the JPF (Java Plugin Framework) which is used in stuff like Eclipse IIRC.
Depending on what language you use I could recommend some tutorial/books. I hope this was helpful.
Plugin architecture is becoming very popular for its extensibility and thus flexibility.
For c++, Apache httpd server is actually plugin based, but a concept of module is used instead. Most of apache features are implemented as modules, like cache, rewrite, load balancing, and even threading model. It is a very modular software I ever saw.
And for java, Eclipse is definitely plugin based. The core of Eclipse is an OSGI module system which manage bundles, another concept for plugin. Bundle can provide extension points on which we can build modules with less efforts. The most intricate thing in OSGI is its dynamic characteristic, which means bundles can be installed or uninstalled at runtime. No stop-the-world syndrome any more!
Since I dont have enough rep points to leave a comment, I am posting this as an answer. SharpDevelop is an IDE for developing applications in C#/VB.NET/Boo. It has a pretty impressive architecture that allows itself to be extended in a number of ways - right from new menu items to development support for whole new languages.
It uses a bit of XML configuration to act as a glue layer between a core of the IDE and the plugin implementation. It handles locating, loading and versioning of plugins out of the box. Deploying new plugins is matter of simply copying in the new xml configuration file and the required assemblies (DLLs) and restarting the application. You can read more on this in the book "Dissecting a csharp application" by the original author(s) - Christian Holm, Mike Krüger, Bernhard Spuida of the application from here. The book doesnt seem to be available on that site, but i found a copy that might still be around here
Also found a related question here
Checkout "CAB" - Microsoft's Composition Application Building blocks Framework. I think they've got a "web version" of that too...
I have just started to develop a smart client application. These are two options I am considering.
Using Microsoft's System.AddIn namespace. Looks very promising, however it may be a little complex for our end solution.
Or the Smart Client - Composite UI Application Block from Microsoft
Recently, i have looked at taking components both the Composite UI Application Block and the System.AddIn namespace to build my own. Since source code is available for the CAB it is easy to extend. I think our end solution will be a light weight version of the CAB, definatly using the Unity Application Block
If you work with .Net, our research yielded two approaches: scripting and composition.
Scripting
You extend the functionality of what your classes can do by orchestrating them using scripts. That means exposing what is compiled in your favorite .Net language in a dynamic language.
Some options we found worth exploring:
IronPython
IronRuby
JavaScript: Jint, Jurassic and JavaScript .Net are good starting points.
Script.Net -> this one was the first one to call our attention.
Composition
If you start a project with .Net 4 or above, you must take a good look at the Managed Extensibility Framework (MEF). It allows you to extend the functionality of your apps in a plugin way.
The Managed Extensibility Framework (MEF) is a composition layer for
.NET that improves the flexibility, maintainability and testability of
large applications. MEF can be used for third-party plugin
extensibility, or it can bring the benefits of a loosely-coupled
plugin-like architecture to regular applications.
Managed Add-in Framework is also a good read.
MSDN: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd460648.aspx
Codeplex: http://mef.codeplex.com/
Rather than re-inventing the wheel, use the frameworks in hand. Eclipse and Netbeans both support plugin based extensions. You have to work in Java though.