Auto-Generated Validation Code

ctopenpetra

Hi Christian

Where you validation process automagically generates code with multiple checks on a single field, would it be possible to conflate them thereby reducing code and making it slightly faster. E.g.:

if (!ARow.IsRecipientLedgerNumberNull())
{
// 'RecipientLedgerNumber' must have a value (NOT NULL constraint)
ValidationColumn = ARow.Table.Columns[AGiftDetailTable.ColumnRecipientLedgerNumberId];

            if (AValidationControlsDict.TryGetValue(ValidationColumn, out ValidationControlsData))
            {
                VerificationResult = TGeneralChecks.ValueMustNotBeNull(ARow.IsRecipientLedgerNumberNull() ? null : "",
                    ValidationControlsData.ValidationControlLabel,
                    AContext, ValidationColumn, ValidationControlsData.ValidationControl);

                // Handle addition to/removal from TVerificationResultCollection
                AVerificationResultCollection.Auto_Add_Or_AddOrRemove(AContext, VerificationResult, ValidationColumn);
            }
        }

        if (!ARow.IsRecipientLedgerNumberNull())
        {
            // 'RecipientLedgerNumber' must not have more than 10 digits and no decimals
            ValidationColumn = ARow.Table.Columns[AGiftDetailTable.ColumnRecipientLedgerNumberId];

            if (AValidationControlsDict.TryGetValue(ValidationColumn, out ValidationControlsData))
            {
                VerificationResult = TNumericalChecks.IsNumberPrecisionNotExceeded(ARow.RecipientLedgerNumber, 10, 0,
                    ValidationControlsData.ValidationControlLabel,
                    AContext, ValidationColumn, ValidationControlsData.ValidationControl);

                // Handle addition to/removal from TVerificationResultCollection
                AVerificationResultCollection.Auto_Add_Or_AddOrRemove(AContext, VerificationResult, ValidationColumn);
            }
        }

That could become:

        if (!ARow.IsRecipientLedgerNumberNull())
        {
            ValidationColumn = ARow.Table.Columns[AGiftDetailTable.ColumnRecipientLedgerNumberId];

            if (AValidationControlsDict.TryGetValue(ValidationColumn, out ValidationControlsData))
            {
	    // RecipientLedgerNumber' must have a value (NOT NULL constraint)                    
	    VerificationResult = TNumericalChecks.IsNumberPrecisionNotExceeded(ARow.RecipientLedgerNumber, 10, 0,
                    ValidationControlsData.ValidationControlLabel,
                    AContext, ValidationColumn, ValidationControlsData.ValidationControl);

                // Handle addition to/removal from TVerificationResultCollection
                AVerificationResultCollection.Auto_Add_Or_AddOrRemove(AContext, VerificationResult, ValidationColumn);

	    // 'RecipientLedgerNumber' must not have more than 10 digits and no decimals
                VerificationResult = TGeneralChecks.ValueMustNotBeNull(ARow.IsRecipientLedgerNumberNull() ? null : "",
                    ValidationControlsData.ValidationControlLabel,
                    AContext, ValidationColumn, ValidationControlsData.ValidationControl);

                // Handle addition to/removal from TVerificationResultCollection
                AVerificationResultCollection.Auto_Add_Or_AddOrRemove(AContext, VerificationResult, ValidationColumn);
            }
        }

Is it possible/easy to do?

Thanks

Chris

christiankatict

Hi Chris,

I agree that this would be nice. I tried to get the code generator to write code like that, but couldn't get it done in a time that I thought would be appropriate for the benefit.

I don't think that performance will be an issue here at all as most Method calls that are currently duplicated in such scenarios are very good candidates for C# Compiler inlining and are very short. Only one of the Method call involves a loop, and that is only looping over a small Dictionary and not doing anything that would consume much CPU cycles.

In general, auto-generated code doesn't need to be as concise as it could be, as long as it isn't hard to understand, and the that code we are talking about is easy enough to understand.

I leave it at that as we are having more important things to fix that really affect the way how the application works.

Kind regards,

ChristianK