# Clean deployment of .NET Core application

Microsofts .NET Core framework has rightfully earned its spot among cross-platform frameworks. We like to use it for example as a RESTful backend for our react frontends. If you are not burying your .NET Core application in a docker container without the need to configure/customize it you may feel agitated by its default deployment layout: All the dependencies live next to some JSON configuration files in one directory.

While this is ok if you do not need to look in there for a configuration file and change something you may like to clean it up and put the files into different folders. This can be achieved by customizing your MS build but it is all but straightforward!

# Our goal

1. Put all of our dependencies into a lib directory
2. Put all of our configuration files int a configuration directory
3. Remove unneeded files

The above should not require any interaction but be part of the regular build process.

# The journey

We need to customize the MSBuild system to achieve our goal because the deps.json file must be rewritten to change the location of our dependencies. This is the hardest part! First we add the RoslynCodeTaskFactory as a package reference to our MSbuild in the csproj of our project. That we we can implement tasks using C#. We define two tasks that will help us in rewriting the deps.json:

<Project ToolsVersion="15.8" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/developer/msbuild/2003">
<UsingTask TaskName="RegexReplaceFileText" TaskFactory="CodeTaskFactory" AssemblyFile="$(RoslynCodeTaskFactory)" Condition=" '$(RoslynCodeTaskFactory)' != '' ">
<ParameterGroup>
<InputFile ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
<OutputFile ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
<MatchExpression ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
<ReplacementText ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
</ParameterGroup>
<Using Namespace="System" />
<Using Namespace="System.IO" />
<Using Namespace="System.Text.RegularExpressions" />
<Code Type="Fragment" Language="cs">
<![CDATA[ File.WriteAllText( OutputFile, Regex.Replace(File.ReadAllText(InputFile), MatchExpression, ReplacementText) ); ]]>
</Code>

<UsingTask TaskName="RegexTrimFileText" TaskFactory="CodeTaskFactory" AssemblyFile="$(RoslynCodeTaskFactory)" Condition=" '$(RoslynCodeTaskFactory)' != '' ">
<ParameterGroup>
<InputFile ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
<OutputFile ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
<MatchExpression ParameterType="System.String" Required="true" />
</ParameterGroup>
<Using Namespace="System" />
<Using Namespace="System.IO" />
<Using Namespace="System.Text.RegularExpressions" />
<Code Type="Fragment" Language="cs">
<![CDATA[ File.WriteAllText( OutputFile, Regex.Replace(File.ReadAllText(InputFile), MatchExpression, "") ); ]]>
</Code>
</Project>


We put the tasks in a file called RegexReplace.targets file in the Build directory and import it in our csproj using <Import Project="Build/RegexReplace.targets" />.

Now we can just add a new target that is executed after the publish target to our main project csproj to move the assemblies around, rewrite the deps.json and remove unwanted files:

  <Target Name="PostPublishActions" AfterTargets="AfterPublish">
<ItemGroup>
<Libraries Include="$(PublishUrl)\*.dll" Exclude="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.dll" />
</ItemGroup>
<ItemGroup>
<Unwanted Include="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.pdb;$(PublishUrl)\.filenesting.json" />
</ItemGroup>
<Move SourceFiles="@(Libraries)" DestinationFolder="$(PublishUrl)/lib" /> <Copy SourceFiles="Build\MyProject.runtimeconfig.json;Build\web.config" DestinationFiles="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.runtimeconfig.json;$(PublishUrl)\web.config" /> <Delete Files="@(Libraries)" /> <Delete Files="@(Unwanted)" /> <RemoveDir Directories="$(PublishUrl)\Build" />
<RegexTrimFileText InputFile="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.deps.json" OutputFile="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.deps.json" MatchExpression="(?&lt;=&quot;).*[/|\\](?=.*\.dll|.*\.exe)" />
<RegexReplaceFileText InputFile="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.deps.json" OutputFile="$(PublishUrl)\MyProject.deps.json" MatchExpression="&quot;path&quot;: &quot;.*&quot;" ReplacementText="&quot;path&quot;: &quot;.&quot;" />
</Target>


# The result

All this work should result in a working application with a root directory layout like in the image. As far as we know the remaining files like the web.config, the main project assembly and the two json files cannot easily relocated. The resulting layout is nevertheless quite clean and makes it easy for administrators to find the configuration files they need to customize.

Of course one can argue if the result is worth the hassle but if your customers’ administrators and operations value it you should do it.

In the german military forces, there is a new idea coming into effect: Give your commanders the ability to spend free expenses (linked article is in german language). Like, if your battailon lacks sunglasses, you don’t have to wait for bureaucracy to procure them for you (and it probably takes longer than the sun is your immediate problem), you can go out and just buy them.

This is not a new idea, and not a bad one. It implements a simple principle: Resources follow responsibilities. If you have goals to reach, decisions to make and people to manage, you need proper resources. And by resources, I don’t only mean money. Some leniency in procedures, maneuvering space (both real and figuratively) and time are resources that can’t be bought with money, but are essential sometimes.

At our company, we installed this principle over a decade ago. The “creativity budget” is a budget of free expenses for each employee to improve their particular working situation. This might mean a new computer mouse, a conference visit or a specific software. You, the employee, are at the frontline of your work and probably knows best what’s needed. Our creativity budget is the means to obtain it, no questions asked.

And this shows the underlying core principle: Responsibilities follow trust. If I trust you to reach the goals, to make the right decisions and to manage your team, it would be inconsequential to not give you the proper responsibilities. And, transitively, to provide you with adequate resources. As it seems, responsibilities are the middle man between trust and resources.

At our company, you don’t need to invest your free expenses for basic work attire. We are software engineers, so “work attire” means a high-class computer (with several monitors, currently our default is three), a powerful notebook, a decent smartphone and all the non-technical stuff that will determine your long-term work output, like a fitting desk and your personal, comfortable work chair.

For me, it was always consequential that great results can only come from the combination of a great developer and great equipment. I cannot understand how it is expected from developers to produce top-notch software on mediocre or even subpar computers and tools. In my opinion, these things strongly relate with each other. Give your developers good equipment and good results will follow. Putting it in a simplistic formula: the ability of the developer multiplied with the power of the equipment makes the quality of the software result.

So, if I trust your ability as a developer, provide you with premium equipment, give you room to maneuver and resources to cover your individual requirements, there should be nothing in the way to hold you back. And that places another responsibility onto your shoulder: You are responsible for your work results. And you deserve all the praise for the better ones. Because without you, the able developer, all the prerequisites listed above would still yield to nothing.

# There are more exact numbers than you might know

There are lots of annoying problems a programmer can run into, when working with the inexact floating point numbers supported by common cpus. So the idea of using rational numbers

$\frac{n}{d}$

with arbitrary size integers $n,d$ for floating point computation can be quite appealing. However, if you really try this in practice, you are likely to end up with unacceptable performance (for an example, see the post The Great Rational Explosion on this blog).
Another problem with the rationals is, that they don’t support lots of mathematical operations. For example, any prime will not have a rational square root and numbers like $\pi$ and $e$ are not rational.
This post is about the problem of the missing square roots. I will sketch how the rationals can be extended by some specific real numbers. The focus is on what can be done and not how it can be done.

The point of the following example is that we can extend the rational numbers by some new numbers such that we have the square root of 2 and are still able to perform the basic arithmetic operations, i.e. addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by non-zero numbers. And of course, we still want to have the absolute exactness of the rationals.
To achieve this goal, our new numbers can be represented as tuples $(a,b)$ of rational numbers $a,b$. The idea is, that $(a,b)$ stands for the real number

$a+b\sqrt{2}$

And now, a small miracle happens: If you have two of those new numbers then all of the basic arithmetic operations are again given as one of our new numbers! You can believe me or just check this for yourself now. So in total, we have extended the realm of exact calculation to real numbers which are of the form

$a+b\sqrt{2}$.

This is admittedly a bit lame, since we are still far away from calculating general square roots. But the miracle mentioned above is actually not so small and happens in way more generality: The real number $\sqrt{2}$ that we added to the rationals is the solution of the polynomial equation

$X^2=2$ or equivalently $X^2-2=0$

and we can do the same thing with any irrational real number that is the solution of some polynomial equation

$a_n X^n + a_{n-1} X^{n-1} + \dots + a_1 X^1 + a_0 = 0$ or $P(X)=0$

(where $a_n,\dots,a_0$ are rational numbers).
For this general construction, the polynomial above has to be chosen such that $n$ is as small as possible. Then the new numbers can be represented as tuples of length $n$. For the basic arithmetic operations, we think of a tuples $(b_n,\dots,b_0)$ as the polynomial

$b_n X^n+\dots b_1 X^1 + b_0$

and define addition to be addition of those polynomials. To multiply two tuples, take the product of the polynomials and its remainder on division by $P$. You can check out how this recipie does the right thing in the example with $P=X^2-2$. To avoid confusion, let us put the polynomial defining in which extension of the rationals we are into the number. So know, a number is a tuple

$(P,b_n,\dots,b_0)$.

In particular, there are extensions that contain a square root of an arbitrary rational. But if we look at, say, $\sqrt{2}$ and $\sqrt{3}$ we will get two extensions. So we have $\sqrt{2}$ and $\sqrt{3}$ but we can’t do anything that involves both of them. Or in other words, if we have two numbers, $(P,b_n,\dots,b_0)$ and $(Q,c_m,\dots,c_0)$ we don’t know how to perform basic arithmetic unless $n=m$ and $P=Q$.

Here is an easy way to fix this: If we take a step back, we can realize that everything we did above doesn’t need specific features of the rational numbers. The basic arithmetic operations are enough. So we can apply the construction of new numbers including some root to an extension of the rationals. For the problem mentioned above, that would give us tuples of the form

$(X^2-3, (X^2-2, a, b), (X^2-2, c, d))$

– now with four rational numbers $a,b,c,d$.
The corresponding general pattern for an extension (of some extension …) is:

$(P, a_0,\dots, a_n)$

Where the numbers $a_i$ are from some fixed extension and $P$ is a polynomial with coefficients from this fixed extension. We also have to make sure, that $P$ has a property called irreducible. It means that $P$ has at least degree 1 and there is no pair of polynomials $Q,R$ with lesser degree (and coefficients in the extension) such that their product $P\cdot R$ is equal to $P$. If this is not the case, weird things will happen.
Note that if we keep extending our numbers on demand, we can now get square roots of everything, in fact, this even works for square roots of negative numbers. But there are some unmentioned problems, if we want to mix numbers from different towers of extensions. On the other hand, there are also lots of unmentioned possibilites: These construction are pretty general and they can also be applied to finite fields or some extension of the rationals which contains a trancendent element like $\pi$. But I will stop here since my goal of showing some exact representations of numbers that surprised myself once, is reached.

If you want to learn more about the mathematical background, this pdf might help. There is also a way to join two extensions to one of the form we discussed here, the key is this nice theorem: Primitive Element Theorem. There are lots of nice mathematical facts in this area. My former Algebra working group in Karlsruhe, in particular Fabian Ruoff, kindly reminded me of some of them over lunch, when I was discussing the topics of this post.
Then, there are of course implementations. Here is a class in the cgal library for square roots.

# Have unregistered classes throw with the unity DI container

The unity container (not to be confused with game engine) is one of the most popular dependency injection tools for C#.
However, by default the unity container will try to Resolve() all classes that it can. If you do not register a class, it will will often just succeed anyways.
I much prefer explicitly registering classes, and resolution just throwing and exception if I try to resolve something I did not register.
There’s a viable solution for that on stackoverflow, but it fails to throw when trying to resolve a class that was only registered via its interface.
Here’s our fixed version:

public class UnityRegistrationTracking : UnityContainerExtension
{
private readonly ConcurrentDictionary<NamedTypeBuildKey, bool> registrations =
new ConcurrentDictionary<NamedTypeBuildKey, bool>();

protected override void Initialize()
{
base.Context.Registering += Context_Registering;
new ValidateRegistrationStrategy(this.registrations), UnityBuildStage.Setup);
}

private void Context_Registering(object sender, RegisterEventArgs e)
{
var buildKey = new NamedTypeBuildKey(e.TypeFrom, e.Name);
(key, oldValue) => true);
}

public class ValidateRegistrationStrategy : BuilderStrategy
{
private ConcurrentDictionary<NamedTypeBuildKey, bool> registrations;

public ValidateRegistrationStrategy(ConcurrentDictionary<NamedTypeBuildKey, bool> registrations)
{
this.registrations = registrations;
}

public override void PreBuildUp(ref BuilderContext context)
{
var buildKey = new NamedTypeBuildKey(context.RegistrationType, context.Name);
if (!this.registrations.ContainsKey(buildKey))
{
throw new ResolutionFailedException(buildKey.Type, buildKey.Name,
string.Format("Type {0} was not explicitly registered in the container.", buildKey.Type.Name));
}
}
}
}


We hook into two parts of the unity API here:

1. The registration, which is called when you call Unity.RegisterType
2. The resolution process, which is called when unity tries to resolve a specific instance.

The first part happens in Context_Registering. We just store the registration in dictionary for later. It is important to use TypeFrom as a key, since we want to refer to objects by the interfaces they are registered with, not their concrete implementations.
The second part is the ValidateRegistrationStrategy. All registered BuilderStrategy objects go in a list that is processed when an object is built. The UnityBuildStage.Setup acts as a sorting key, to make sure that this strategy is executed as early as possible.
In the strategy, we check whether the requested type was previously registered, and throw an exception if it was not. It is important to use context.RegistrationType here, since context.Type will again contain the concrete type, and not the interface.

# Migrating from JScience quantities to Unit API 2.0

If you’re developing software that operates a lot with physical quantities you absolutely should use a library that defines types for quantities and supports safe conversions between units of measurements. Our go-to library for this in Java was JScience. The latest version of JScience is 4.3.1, which was released in 2012.

Since then a group of developers has formed that strives towards the standardization of a units API for Java. JScience maintainer Jean-Marie Dautelle is actively involved in this effort. The group operates under the name Units of Measurement alongside with their GitHub presence unitsofmeasurement.

Over the years there have been several JSRs (Java Specification Requests) by the group:

The current state of affairs is JSR-385, which is the basis of this post. The Units of Measurement API 2.0, or Unit API 2.0 for short, was released in July 2019.

### JARs

While JScience is distributed as one JAR (~600 KiB), a setup of Unit API involves three JARs (~300 KiB in total):

• unit-api-2.0.jar
• indriya-2.0.jar
• uom-lib-common-2.0.jar

JScience offers a lot more functionality than just quantities and units, but that’s the part we have been using and what we are interested in.

The unit-api JAR only defines interfaces, which is the scope of JSR-385. So you need an implementation to do anything useful with it. The reference implementation is called Indriya, provided by the second JAR. The third JAR, uom-lib-common, is a utility library used by Indriya for common functionality shared with other projects under the Units of Measurement umbrella.

### Using quantities

Here’s a simple use of a physical quantity with JScience, in this example Length:

import org.jscience.physics.amount.Amount;

import javax.measure.quantity.Length;

import static javax.measure.unit.SI.*;

// ...

final Amount<Length> d = Amount.valueOf(214, CENTI(METRE));
final double d_metre = d.doubleValue(METRE);


And here’s the equivalent code using Units API 2.0 and Indriya:

import tech.units.indriya.quantity.Quantities;

import javax.measure.Quantity;
import javax.measure.quantity.Length;

import static javax.measure.MetricPrefix.CENTI;
import static tech.units.indriya.unit.Units.METRE;

// ...

final Quantity<Length> d = Quantities.getQuantity(214, CENTI(METRE));
final double d_metre = d.to(METRE).getValue().doubleValue();


### Consistency

While JScience also defines aliases with alternative spellings like METER and constants for many prefixed units like CENTIMETER or MILLIMETER, Indriya encourages consistency and only allows METRE, CENTI(METRE), MILLI(METRE).

### Quantity names

Most quantities have the same names in both projects, but there are some differences:

• Amount<Duration> becomes Quantity<Time>
• Amount<Velocity> becomes Quantity<Speed>

In these cases Unit API uses the correct SI names, i.e. time and speed. Wikipedia explains the difference between speed and velocity.

### Arithmetic operations

The method names for the elementary arithmetic operations have changed:

• minus() becomes subtract()
• times() becomes multiply()

Only the method name for division is the same:

• divide() is still divide()

However, the runtime exceptions thrown on division by zero are different:

• JScience: java.lang.ArithmeticException: / by zero
• Indriya: java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: cannot initalize a rational number with divisor equal to ZERO

### Type hints

If you divide or multiply two quantities the Java type system needs a type hint, because it doesn’t know the resulting quantity. Here’s how this looks in JScience versus Unit API:

With JScience:

Amount<Area> a = Amount.valueOf(100, SQUARE_METRE);
Amount<Length> b = Amount.valueOf(10, METRE);
Amount<Length> c = a.divide(b)
.to(METRE);


With Unit API:

Quantity<Area> a = Quantities.getQuantity(100, SQUARE_METRE);
Quantity<Length> b = Quantities.getQuantity(10, METRE);
Quantity<Length> c = a.divide(b)
.asType(Length.class);


### Comparing quantities

If you want to compare quantities via compareTo(), isLessThan(), etc. you need quantities of type ComparableQuantity. The Quantities.getQuantity() factory method returns a ComparableQuantity, which is a sub-interface of Quantity.

### Defining custom units

Defining custom units is very similar to JScience. Here’s an example for degree (angle), which is not an SI unit:

public static final Unit<Angle> DEGREE_ANGLE =
MultiplyConverter.ofPiExponent(1).concatenate(MultiplyConverter.ofRational(1, 180)));


# Lombok-Tooling surprise

Some months ago we took over development and maintenance of a Java EE-based web application. The project has ok-code for the most part and uses mostly standard libraries from the Java ecosystem. One of them is lombok which strives to reduce the boilerplate code needed and make the code more readable and concise.

Fortunately there is a plugin for IntelliJ, our favourite Java IDE that understands lombok and allows for easy navigation and code hints. For example you can jump from getMyField() to the lombok-annotated backing field of the getter and so on.

This sounds very good but some day we were debugging a weird behaviour. An abstract class contained a special implementation of a Map as its field and was annotated with @Getter and @Setter. But somehow the type and contents of the Map changed without calling the setter.

What was happening here? After a quite some time digging spent in the debugger we noticed, that the getter was overridden in a subclass. Normally, IntelliJ shows an Icon with navigation options beside overridden/overriding methods. Unfortunately for us not for lombok annotations!

Consider the following code:

public class SuperClass {

@Getter
private List strings = new ArrayList();

public List getInts() {
return new ArrayList();
}
}

public class NotSoSuperClass extends SuperClass {
@Override
public List getStrings() {
return Arrays.asList("Many", "Strings");
}

@Override
public List getInts() {
return Arrays.asList(1,2,3);
}
}


The corresponding code in IntelliJ looks like this:

Notice that IntelliJ puts a nice little icon next to the line number where the class or a methods is subclassed/overridden. But not so for the lombok getter. This tiny detail lead to quite a surprise and cost us some hours.

Of course you can argue, that the code design is broken, but hey, that was the state and the tools are there to help you discover such weird quirks.

We opened an issue for the lombok IntelliJ plugin, so maybe it will be enhanced to provide such additional tooling information to be on par with plain old java code.

# When everything’s an issue

Years ago, I read the novel “Manna” by Marshall Brain. It’s a science fiction story about the robotic takeover and it features “Manna”, an (artificially) intelligent work management software that replaces human managers and runs the shop. The story starts with “Manna” and goes on to explore the implications of such a system on mankind. It’s a good read and contains a lot of thoughts about what kind of labor we want to do.

The idea that really captivated me was the company that runs itself. Don’t get me wrong: Most organizations are so big that the individual employee cannot see the big picture anymore. Those organizations seem to “run itself” to the untrained eye, but it is still humans that manage the workload. And like all humans, they make mistakes and, perhaps very subtle, infuse their own selfish goals into the process. But an organization that has its goals and instructs its workers (humans and machines alike) directly is an interesting thought for me.

It also is totally unrealistic with today’s technology and probably contains some risks that should be explored carefully before implementing such a system in the wild.

But what about a more down-to-earth approach that achieves the core advancement of “Manna” without many or all of the risks? What if the organization doesn’t instruct, but makes its needs visible and relies on humans to interpret and schedule those needs and fulfill them? In essence, a “Manna” system without the sensors and decision-making and certainly without the creepy snooping tendencies. Built with today’s technology, that’s called an automated work scheduler.

And that is what we’ve built at our company. We use an issue tracking system to manage and schedule our project work already. We extended its usage to manage and schedule our administrative work, too. Now, every work unit in the company is (or could be) accompanied by an issue in the issue tracker. And just like software developers don’t change code without an issue, we don’t change our company’s data or decisions without an issue that also provides a place for documentation related to the process. We’ve come to the conclusion that most of those administrative issues are recurring. So we automated their creation.

Our very early stage “Manna” system is called “issue scheduler”, a highly creative name on its own. It is a system that basically contains a lot of glorified cron expressions and just enough data to create a meaningful issue in the issue tracker, should a cron expression fire. So basically, our company creates issues for us on a fixed schedule. Let’s look at some examples:

• We add a new article to our developer blog (you’re reading it right now) every week. This means that every week, our “issue scheduler” creates a blog issue and assigns it to the next author in line. This is done some time in advance to give the author enough time to prepare and possibly trade with other authors. Our developer blog has the “need” for one article each week, but it doesn’t require a particular topic or author. This need is made visible by the automatic blog issues and it is our duty to fulfill this need. On a side note: Maybe you’ve noticed that I wrote two blog articles in direct succession. There is definitely some issue trading going on behind the scenes right now!
• We tend to have many plants in our office. To look at something green and living adds to our comfort. But those plants have needs, too. They probably make their needs pretty visible, but we aren’t expert plant caregivers. So we gave the “issue scheduler” some entries to inform us about the regular watering and fertilization duties for our office plants. A detailed description of the actual work exists in our company wiki and a link to it gives the caregiver of the week all the information that’s needed.
• Every month, we are required to file a sales tax summary report. This is a need of the german government agencies that we incorporate into our company’s needs. To work on this issue, you need to have more information and security clearances than fits on a wiki page, but to process is documented nonetheless. So once a month, our company automatically creates an issue that says “do your taxes now!” and assigns it to our administrative employees.

These are three examples of recurring tasks that are covered by our poor man’s “Manna” system. To give you a perspective on the scale of this system for a small company like ours, we currently have about 140 distinct rules for recurring issues. Some of them fire almost every day, some of them sleep for years and wake up just in time to express a certain need of the company that otherwise would surerly be forgotten or rediscovered after the fact.

This approach relieves us from the burden to remember all the tasks and their schedules and lets us concentrate on completing them. And our system, in contrast to “Manna” in the story, isn’t judging or controlling. If you don’t think the plants need any more water, just resolve the issue with “won’t fix”. Perhaps you can explain your decision in a short comment for other humans, but our “issue scheduler” won’t notice.

This isn’t the robotic takeover, after all. It’s just automated scheduling of recurring work. And it works great.