Does Visual Studio 2017 work with Code Contracts?

Question

I just installed the newly released Visual Studio 2017 Enterprise (RC). I'm having trouble getting it to work with Code Contracts, however. I have no problem using Code Contracts with Visual Studio 2015. Am I missing something?

Answer 1

As others have noted, Microsoft hasn't prioritized Code Contracts and its long-term support remains unclear (though there has been some ongoing discussion about language-level integration via Roslyn).

As of March 11th, 2017, however, community contributor Yaakov has, at least, updated the source code to include the Visual Studio 2017 build targets (thank you!). This version provides support for both static checking during compilation, as well as run-time validation using CCRewrite.

Note: This build does not provide configuration support via the project's properties pane. As such, code contracts will need to be configured by manually adding the appropriate properties to the csproj file. See @crimbo's answer below for a comprehensive list of properties.

Unfortunately, while these updates have been merged into the master code branch, they are neither reflected in Marketplace distribution or the official NuGet Package. As such, you need to download and compile the source code from the repository (which is easy; just use the supplied BuildCC.bat file).

Important: The static analysis for Code Contracts has a hard-coded dependency on .NET 3.5, which is no longer installed by default in either Windows 10 or Visual Studio 2017. As such, you'll want to ensure this "feature" is enabled (or download it separately); otherwise, you'll get a compile-time error.

Alternatively, as of June 15th, 2017—and later updated on February 6th, 2018—contributor Igor Bek has included this update in his NuGet Package, so the simplest approach is to just add CodeContracts.MSBuild to your packages.config via:

Install-Package CodeContracts.MSBuild -Version 1.12.0

Background: Igor Bek first put this package together as a proof-of-concept for the Code Contracts team, and it was later the basis for the official NuGet package (in v1.10.10126.2). Since Microsoft hasn't updated the official NuGet package, his is now the most up-to-date.

Given the current state of support, I wouldn't encourage people to adopt Code Contracts for new projects, but this should provide backward compatibility for developers who have already invested into Code Contracts for existing .NET Framework projects.

Answer 2

At this time of writing there are no contract definitions for VS2017, but you can get around it with the following if using Nuget package DotNet.Contracts:

• Navigate to the CodeContracts nuget package directory (DotNet.Contracts.1.10.20606.1\MsBuild)
• Copy the v14.0 folder
• Rename it to v15.0

Everything should build as expected.

Answer 3

There is currently no version of Code Contracts for .NET which supports Visual Studio 2017. However the issue can be remedied, if you copy the following target file

C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\4.0\Microsoft.Common.Targets\ImportAfter\CodeContractsAfter.targets

to the ImportAfter location of your VS2017 MSBuild:

C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2017\#YourVS2017Product#\MSBuild\15.0\Microsoft.Common.targets\ImportAfter

Note: Replace #YourVS2017Product# with your VS2017 product name in the above path, e.g. Community.

This will allow you to build with Code Contracts in VS2017, but will not solve the issue of the CC tab not showing in the Project Settings. For that you will still need to switch to VS2015.

Answer 4

The reasons that code contracts don't work in VS 2017 are:

1. Code contracts MSBuild files aren't Imported in the VS 2017 tree of msbuild files (easy to fix)
2. Code contracts configuration UI isn't present in VS 2017 project properties (easily fixed by include CodeContracts msbuild properties)

Certainly questions about the future of CodeContracts are valid, but you can implement the following to enable existing projects that use CodeContracts to build in VS 2017:

1. Add the contents of C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\14.0\Microsoft.Common.Targets\ImportAfter\CodeContractsAfter.targets to your csproj files (either directly or indirectly via an import). The most basic approach is to add this to your csproj file:

   <PropertyGroup>
     <CodeContractsInstallDir Condition="'$(CodeContractsInstallDir)'==''">C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft\Contracts\</CodeContractsInstallDir>
   </PropertyGroup>
   <Import Condition="'$(CodeContractsImported)' != 'true' AND '$(DontImportCodeContracts)' != 'true'" Project="$(CodeContractsInstallDir)MsBuild\v$(VisualStudioVersion)\Microsoft.CodeContracts.targets" />
   

Note that the first PropertyGroup shouldn't be necessary if CodeContracts is installed, b/c CodeContractsInstallDir should be specified as an environment variable. In that case, you can get away by just adding

<Import Condition="'$(CodeContractsImported)' != 'true' AND '$(DontImportCodeContracts)' != 'true'" Project="$(CodeContractsInstallDir)MsBuild\v$(VisualStudioVersion)\Microsoft.CodeContracts.targets" />

to your *.csproj files.

2. Specify all the CodeContracts properties in your *.csproj file (directly or indirectly via Import). Eg:

   <Project ToolsVersion="4.0" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
   
   <!-- Code Contracts settings -->
   <PropertyGroup>
     <CodeContractsAssemblyMode>1</CodeContractsAssemblyMode>
     <CodeContractsEnableRuntimeChecking>True</CodeContractsEnableRuntimeChecking>
     <CodeContractsRuntimeOnlyPublicSurface>False</CodeContractsRuntimeOnlyPublicSurface>
     <CodeContractsRuntimeThrowOnFailure>True</CodeContractsRuntimeThrowOnFailure>
     <CodeContractsRuntimeCallSiteRequires>False</CodeContractsRuntimeCallSiteRequires>
     <CodeContractsRuntimeSkipQuantifiers>False</CodeContractsRuntimeSkipQuantifiers>
     <CodeContractsRunCodeAnalysis>False</CodeContractsRunCodeAnalysis>
     <CodeContractsNonNullObligations>False</CodeContractsNonNullObligations>
     <CodeContractsBoundsObligations>False</CodeContractsBoundsObligations>
     <CodeContractsArithmeticObligations>False</CodeContractsArithmeticObligations>
     <CodeContractsEnumObligations>False</CodeContractsEnumObligations>
     <CodeContractsRedundantAssumptions>False</CodeContractsRedundantAssumptions>
     <CodeContractsInferRequires>False</CodeContractsInferRequires>
     <CodeContractsInferEnsures>False</CodeContractsInferEnsures>
     <CodeContractsInferObjectInvariants>False</CodeContractsInferObjectInvariants>
     <CodeContractsSuggestAssumptions>False</CodeContractsSuggestAssumptions>
     <CodeContractsSuggestRequires>True</CodeContractsSuggestRequires>
     <CodeContractsSuggestEnsures>False</CodeContractsSuggestEnsures>
     <CodeContractsSuggestObjectInvariants>False</CodeContractsSuggestObjectInvariants>
     <CodeContractsDisjunctiveRequires>False</CodeContractsDisjunctiveRequires>
     <CodeContractsRunInBackground>True</CodeContractsRunInBackground>
     <CodeContractsShowSquigglies>False</CodeContractsShowSquigglies>
     <CodeContractsUseBaseLine>False</CodeContractsUseBaseLine>
     <CodeContractsEmitXMLDocs>True</CodeContractsEmitXMLDocs>
     <CodeContractsCacheAnalysisResults>True</CodeContractsCacheAnalysisResults>
     <CodeContractsRuntimeCheckingLevel>Full</CodeContractsRuntimeCheckingLevel>
     <CodeContractsReferenceAssembly>Build</CodeContractsReferenceAssembly>
     <CodeContractsAnalysisWarningLevel>0</CodeContractsAnalysisWarningLevel>
   </PropertyGroup>
   
   <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == 'Debug' ">
   </PropertyGroup>
   
   <PropertyGroup Condition=" '$(Configuration)' == 'Release' ">
     <CodeContractsRuntimeCheckingLevel>ReleaseRequires</CodeContractsRuntimeCheckingLevel>
   </PropertyGroup>
   
   </Project>
   

If you have more than a few projects, I recommend putting these in a private nuget package and referencing that nuget package in each of your projects. The code contracts settings (from step 2) can go in your mycompany.codecontracts.props file, and the code contracts targets (from step 1) can go in your mycompany.codecontracts.targets file.

More info on packaging msbuild properties/targets in a nuget package here: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/nuget/create-packages/creating-a-package#including-msbuild-props-and-targets-in-a-package

I'm willing to provide an example on GitHub if there's sufficient interest.

Answer 5

I found the approaches suggested here were not straightforward, in particular that it would require the changes on each developer's machines and on the build server as well.

I decided to create my own very simplified version of Contract.Requires() that will need only global replace of the using declaration in caller classes.

using MYCommon.Diagnostics; //System.Diagnostics.Contracts;

When/if System.Diagnostics.Contracts will be available for VS 2017 and .NetStandard, it will be easy to revert to the proper version.

The actual class is:

    /// <summary>
    ///   Contract.Requires(config != null); in VS 2017 not throw  ArgumentNullException
    /// The class is workaround for https://stackoverflow.com/questions/40767941/does-vs2017-work-with-codecontracts 
    /// </summary>
    public class Contract
    {
        public static void Requires(bool condition, string message = null)
        {
            Requires<ArgumentNullException>(condition, message);
        }
        public static void Requires<TException>(bool condition, string message=null) where TException:Exception , new ()
        {
            if (!condition)
            {
                //https://stackoverflow.com/questions/41397/asking-a-generic-method-to-throw-specific-exception-type-on-fail/41450#41450
                var e=default(TException);
                try
                {
                    message = message ?? "Unexpected Condition"; //TODO consider to pass condition as lambda expression
                    e =  Activator.CreateInstance(typeof(TException), message) as TException;
                }
                catch (MissingMethodException ex)
                {
                    e = new TException();
                }
                throw e;
            }
        }
    }

The essential limitation is that typical usage Contract.Requires(param1!=null); doesn't allow me to throw the exception with the name of the parameter, and better usage is a bit longer:

Contract.Requires<ArgumentNullException>(param1!=null, "param1 is null");