Add -StrictMode to Invoke-Command to allow specifying strict mode when invoking command locally

[Thomas-Yu]

PR Summary

Fix #2692

Add -StrictMode to Invoke-Command to allow specifying strict mode when invoking command locally.
The -StrictMode parameter sets the provided version to the process. Once the process completes, the StrictMode version is set back to what it was before the Invoke-Command.

It does not support asynchronous jobs on remote machines. Applying a StrictMode version for a remote session is not a trivial change. The StrictMode version would have to be communicated to the target so that it can be applied to the Runspace in the remote session.

In addition to the implementation, an Invoke-Command test file was created with -StrictMode tests.

PR Context

This pull request was opened in response to the "Invoke-Command should support -StrictMode #2692" issue. Now, Invoke-Command supports a -StrictMode parameter.
StrictMode establishes and enforces coding rules in expressions, scripts, and script blocks. This can be useful for running scripts with basic best-practice coding rules. Even though this is not an implementation for async jobs, there are still many useful applications for StrictMode in local processes.

PR Checklist

• PR has a meaningful title
  • Use the present tense and imperative mood when describing your changes
• Summarized changes
• Make sure all .h, .cpp, .cs, .ps1 and .psm1 files have the correct copyright header
• This PR is ready to merge and is not Work in Progress.
  • If the PR is work in progress, please add the prefix WIP: or [ WIP ] to the beginning of the title (the WIP bot will keep its status check at Pending while the prefix is present) and remove the prefix when the PR is ready.
• Breaking changes
  • None
  • OR
  • Experimental feature(s) needed
    • Experimental feature name(s):
• User-facing changes
  • Not Applicable
  • OR
  • Documentation needed
    • Issue filed: Add Documentation for Invoke-Command StrictModeVersion Parameter MicrosoftDocs/PowerShell-Docs#8459
• Testing - New and feature
  • N/A or can only be tested interactively
  • OR
  • Make sure you've added a new test if existing tests do not effectively test the code changed
• Tooling
  • I have considered the user experience from a tooling perspective and don't believe tooling will be impacted.
  • OR
  • I have considered the user experience from a tooling perspective and opened an issue in the relevant tool repository. This may include:
    • Impact on PowerShell Editor Services which is used in the PowerShell extension for VSCode
      (which runs in a different PS Host).
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on Completions (both in the console and in editors) - one of PowerShell's most powerful features.
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on PSScriptAnalyzer (which provides linting & formatting in the editor extensions).
      • Issue filed:
    • Impact on EditorSyntax (which provides syntax highlighting with in VSCode, GitHub, and many other editors).
      • Issue filed:

[ghost]

All CLA requirements met.

[anamnavi]

Looks good overall!

I left some feedback on how you can just use the StrictModeVersion property (instead of creating a field since you don't have any additional logic for this property's setter method and can just use the default setter with the property. @PaulHigin if using the Property instead of additionally creating a field isn't recommended practice in PowerShell project specifically please let me know.

EDIT: since older PowerShell classes use field backing it's up to the author to make this change if they wish but not neccessary.

[PaulHigin]

Sorry, I didn't notice that these comments were not yet submitted.

[ghost]

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

[PaulHigin]

LGTM
@Thomas-Yu Thanks for your contribution!

[PaulHigin]

For my part I am good with these changes.

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 90 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Small
Size       : +78 -12
Percentile : 36%

Total files changed: 3

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +60 -12
.ps1 : +18 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[PaulHigin]

@Thomas-Yu , @daxian-dbw For the record, I don't think it was necessary to split the attribute/conversion classes into two separate implementations. Soon,Set-StrictMode will also take the off value for strict mode version, which means merging these two classes back together. In the mean time, there was no harm in having one set of attribute/conversion implementations. Now when Set-StrictMode is updated to also support off this work will have to be refactored yet again.

@Thomas-Yu Please create an Issue in PowerShell repo that adds off to the Set-StrictMode -Version parameter. The committee would like to see it work the same as for Invoke-Command here for consistency, although it is not necessary to include the changes in this PR.

[daxian-dbw]

LGTM. @Thomas-Yu Thank you for your contribution!
Some of my comments may have resulted in contradictions throughout the review, sorry about that and thanks for your patience!

[daxian-dbw]

@PaulHigin, the issue #16736 has been opened by @Thomas-Yu per your ask. I will merge this PR once you approve it.

[ghost]

🎉v7.3.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

• Release Notes