Good SDLC practices like testing your code before release would pick these types of issues up anyway, to get this level of checking from the compiler was simply not a priority.įast forward to today, the compiler has evolved and the devs have squashed all the bugs and have been able to focus on runtime and productivity improvements. This type of functionality was not in the original versions of the C# compiler.Ģ0 years ago, even if we could, the effort to do this level analysis on code on standard hardware would have significantly reduced developer productivity. There are a lot of possibilities to check for and in a large code base this effort needs to be expended for every variable and every invocation. ToString() is only obvious that it will raise a runtime error because it is a member declared method and if we can be sure that the object has not yet been initialized. What if the method being called was an extension method? Extension methods after all can be called from null references. Your example represents 2 lines of code that happen to exist next to each other in your script today: object obj = null ĭuring design time it is conceivable that more code might come to exist between these two statements, the net effect of this is that the additional logic might set a non-null value to obj: object obj = null īut what about parallel processing, what if obj were set from a different logic block running in parallel, such that between instantiation of obj and the call to obj.ToString() the value was set outside of the code we see here? It might help to think about this from another perspective. It is up to each individual developer or team to decide if they want to promote specific warnings to error status or if you treat all warnings as errors. Everything else that the compiler might have opinions about like conventions and code styles become warnings or notes. Only at the time of executing obj.ToString() can we know with certainty that the value of obj is null, everything else up to that point is an assumption at best. The fact that the value of a variable is null requires specific knowledge about the expected state of that variable at runtime. Once we start doing that what other assumptions might we get wrong?Įrrors are for genuine code violations. The compiler can't assume that the developer doesn't know that this will result in a runtime error. The developer might specifically want to induce a runtime error.The fact that the execution fails at runtime is not necessarily an error, it is only an exception that your application may or may not handle. The code itself satisfies all the compiler rules for compilation and execution. Don't know if this is relevant in any way but I though I'd mention it.The short answer to why it is a warning and not an error is that null reference analysis is not infallible and cannot easily take into account parallel or indirect references. That problem isn't really solved, but I can't recall ever getting that problem with these two containers. I've recently had problems with getting "Error: filesystem layer verification failed for digest sha256" intermittently when installing or updating containers. I've tried restarting the server and starting in Safe Mode. It's two separate instances of Unpackerr that has worked flawlessly for a long time.Ĩ 01:07:11 Unpackerr v0.11.1 Starting! PID: 1, UID: 0, GID: 0, Now: 01:07:11 +0100 CETĨ 01:07:11 Missing Lidarr URL in one of your configurations, skipped and ignored.Ĩ 01:07:11 Missing Sonarr URL in one of your configurations, skipped and ignored.Ĩ 01:07:11 => GoLift Discord: Startup Settings Sonarr Config: 0 serversĨ 01:07:11 runtime error: index out of range with length 0 I'm having troubles getting two containers to start.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |