消息IDE1006命名规则违规：缺少后缀：’异步’

此消息出现在我的控制器中,重点关注以下内容：

public async Task<IActionResult> Index()

这也适用于创建,删除,详细信息和编辑.消息显示为信息,并适用于我的项目中超过1,000次出现.看来我需要将Index更改为IndexAsync
即.
    改变自：

public async Task<IActionResult> Index()
public async Task<IActionResult> Create()
public async Task<IActionResult> Delete(int? id)
public async Task<IActionResult> Details(int? id)

改成：

public async Task<IActionResult> IndexAsync()
public async Task<IActionResult> CreateAsync()
public async Task<IActionResult> DeleteAsync(int? id)
public async Task<IActionResult> DetailsAysnc(int? id)

这似乎是可选的,因为我的项目将构建并且它不是VS 2015中的问题.我不介意做这项工作,我需要确认在Visual Studio 2017 ASP.NET Core中更改它是正确的方法.

Task-like return types for async methods: This introduces the ability
to return any task-like type from an async method. PrevIoUsly these
return types were constrained to Task<T> and Task.

听起来不太明显哪些方法只是检查它们的返回类型是异步的.将它们与异步进行后缀可能是一个好主意.在VS提出这个“建议”之前,有一个previous stack overflow question辩论大会.来自微软的Stephen Toub对此发表了讲话.

If a public method is Task-returning and is asynchronous in nature (as
opposed to a method that is kNown to always execute synchronously to
completion but still returns a Task for some reason),it should have
an “Async” suffix. That’s the guideline. The primary goal here with
the naming is to make it very obvIoUs to a consumer of the
functionality that the method being invoked will likely not complete
all of its work synchronously; it of course also helps with the case
where functionality is exposed with both synchronous and asynchronous
methods such that you need a name difference to distinguish them. How
the method achieves its asynchronous implementation is immaterial to
the naming: whether async/await is used to garner the compiler’s help,
or whether types and methods from System.Threading.Tasks are used
directly (e.g. taskcompletionsource) doesn’t really matter,as that
doesn’t affect the method’s signature as far as a consumer of the
method is concerned.

Of course,there are always exceptions to a guideline. The most
notable one in the case of naming would be cases where an entire
type’s raison d’etre is to provide async-focused functionality,in
which case having Async on every method would be overkill,e.g. the
methods on Task itself that produce other Tasks.

As for void-returning asynchronous methods,it’s not desirable to have
those in public surface area,since the caller has no good way of
kNowing when the asynchronous work has completed. If you must expose a
void-returning asynchronous method publicly,though,you likely do
want to have a name that conveys that asynchronous work is being
initiated,and you Could use the “Async” suffix here if it made sense.
Given how rare this case should be,I’d argue it’s really a
case-by-case kind of decision.

I hope that helps,Steve

底线,这是信息性的.但是,随着Microsoft将返回类型扩展到Task以外,它开始变得越来越像最佳实践.用你自己的判断.

为什么没有内部“调用另一个控制器的操作”功能,而不涉及客户端？我很确定PHP CodeIgniter框架也缺少这个功能.

我能提出的最好的理由是,最终它是不必要的,因为你想要调用的任何代码都可以被分解到某个常见的地方,至少在ASP.Net MVC中,操作可能非常昂贵.但是a lot of people ask about this,它似乎最终将是一种便利.

所以……很多聪明人设计了这些框架.没有这个必须有一些很好的理由吗？

如果您有任何业务逻辑,特别是如果它将被重用,它应该进入模型,而不是控制器.您还可以根据某些条件或某些内容在控制器中指定不同的视图.如果你有重复的代码不适合模型,那么它应该最终可以作为静态辅助函数,或者在库类中.

所以,是的,当你说：我认为你是对的

The best reason that I can come up with is that ultimately it’s unnecessary,since any code you want to call into Could be factored out into someplace common

这会迫使您保持在MVC模式中.

无论如何最好保持控制器的轻量级.

http://docs.spring.io/spring/docs/current/javadoc-api/org/springframework/web/servlet/mvc/Controller.html

这些是实现Controller类

AbstractController
AbstractUrlViewController
MultiActionController
ParameterizableViewController
ServletForwardingController
ServletWrappingController
UrlFilenameViewController
AbstractWizardFormController
SimpleFormController

但是当我们在Spring MVC中使用@Controller注释时
程序如何知道我们的@Controller注释正在实现
任何这些控制器,请有人解释我

如今,当我们有注释时,模型已经改变了.我们可以为每个控制器类处理多个请求类型.因为在单个@Controller注释类中,我们可以处理许多请求映射.

Controller注释是一个专门的@Component,它告诉Spring它内部会找到@RequestMapping处理程序.这些处理程序可用于返回Json,HTML或上传文件.

现在,与同一模块连接的逻辑可以放在单个控制器类下,您可以更灵活地实现所需的功能.其次,@ Controller使我们能够显着减少代码量.