Suggestion: VB.NET lightbulb for removing setter bulk code

[hartmair]

It would be nice to have a lightbulb quickaction for removing redundant setter bulk code (value as …). Originated from dotnet/vblang#344 (comment)

Version Used:
15.8.9
15.9.0 Preview 5.0

Steps to Reproduce:

Class Class1
    Property Property1 As Integer
        Get
            ...
        End Get
        Set(value As Integer)
            ' do something with value
        End Set
    End Property
End Class

Expected Behavior:
Lightbulb QuickAction to remove redundant setter bulk code (value as ...)

Class Class1
    Property Property1 As Integer
        Get
            ...
        End Get
' lightbulb on next line which changes into
        Set
            ' do something with value
        End Set
    End Property
End Class

Actual Behavior:
None

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@hartmair Would you be interested in contributing such a fix?

[Neme12]

Interesting... would this fall into "code style" or "code quality"? I can imagine some people preferring to always be explicit here.

[CyrusNajmabadi]

I would count it as 'style' as it's effectively a decision about implicit/explicit naming here. It feels like it would fit naturally into our 'fade out if necessary and can be trivially removed' bucket.

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@Neme12 Would you like to take this one?

[Neme12]

I'll add this to my backlog, but VB is not something I am super excited about 😄

[CyrusNajmabadi]

fair enough :)

[hartmair]

@CyrusNajmabadi

@hartmair Would you be interested in contributing such a fix?

Yes, however, I would need a lot of guidance since I don't know anything of Roslyn yet.

@Neme12

I'll add this to my Backlog

thx. I am glad to help if it is useful to you.

[jrmoreno1]

Would this be done with an Analyzer/CodeFixProvider?

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@jrmoreno1 Yes it would.

[jrmoreno1]

I'd be willing to take it on as well, if @Neme12 doesn't mind.

The diagnostic and code fix in themselves aren’t a problem, but I’m not sure just where in the Roslyn source tree they should go.

roslyn/src/Features/VisualBasic/Portable?

With a name like RemoveUnecessarySetParameter?

[jrmoreno1]

Should it be in VB or C#?
dotnet/vblang#360

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@jrmoreno1 This should be written in VB.

Here are the rules for IDE features:

1. For a feature that is shared between C# and VB, we write the common code for it in C# in a shared lib we call 'Features'. Any C# or VB-specific pieces of hte feature are then in teh 'CSharpFeatures' and 'VisualBasicFeatures' projects.
2. For any features that are totally language specific (i.e. "using pattern matching" in C#, or this new feature you're discussing), we'd place all the code in 'CSharpFeatures' or 'VisualBasicFeatures'.

[jrmoreno1]

@CyrusNajmabadi : what version of the framework?

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@jrmoreno1 i don't understand your question. can you clarify it?

[jrmoreno1]

Perhaps it’s a silly question. I was first going to create a project outside of the Roslyn solution and wanted to know what framework version to use, but on thinking about it that probably won’t mattter when I figure out where to put it. I’ll try to get further on my own before bothering you again.

Also, I somehow missed your comments on where it should go on first reading, thanks for the additional info.

[CyrusNajmabadi]

@jrmoreno1 Ah gotcha.

And don't worry about bothering me. I'm happy to help. Note: it may be faster to use gitter.im for that purpose though.

[jrmoreno1]

@hartmair, @CyrusNajmabadi :
Would this be expected to operate or not on code decorated with generated code attributes?

GeneratedCodeAttribute, CompilerGeneratedAttribute, DesignerGenerated, SuppressMessageAttribute, others? If checking for this, do so at the class or property level?