If you've ever needed to ensure that multiple threads are not running the same code, you've probably used a lock-statement in your .NET/C#-code.

Sometimes a regular lock can be too aggressive and lock too much running code for too long. You can solve this by cleverly locking on unique objects, but that handling is complex, error-prone and can become tedious.

Many times you know that you have a specific value or ID which is the key you want to lock on. For instance, you might want your code to not write to the database from multiple actions performed in parallel on your web-application. Using the Nuget-package KeyLocks will give you easy to write syntax to handle this:

private static KeyLock<string> _keyLock = new KeyLock<string>();

public void Main()
{
    Parallel.Invoke(
        () => { UpdateData("entity-123", "First new value"); },
        () => { UpdateData("entity-123", "Second new value"); }, // This will await line above
        () => { UpdateData("another-entity-456", "Another new value"); },        
        () => { UpdateData("yet-another-entity-789", "Yet another new value"); });
}

private void UpdateData(string id, string value)
{
    _keyLock.RunWithLock(id, () =>
    {
        // Execute locked code
    });
}

Make sure the instance of KeyLock<T> is shared between threads executing the code you want to lock on. In this case, I solved it by making the instance static and therefore shared across all instances of the code using it.

The package also contains the type NameLock is a short-hand term for KeyLock<string>. It defaults to being case-sensitive, but that can be changed by passing the correct IEqualityComparer<T> as a constructor-argument like this:

var nameLock = new NameLock(StringComparer.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase)

See the README-file on GitHub for the latest detailed information about KeyLocks. Or try it out through Nuget by running Install-Package KeyLocks in your project. You can even follow the absolutely latest build on MyGet.

According to Wikipedia the date and time-format RFC3339/ISO 8601 usages includes:

On the Internet, the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) uses ISO 8601 in defining a profile of the standard that restricts the supported date and time formats to reduce the chance of error and the complexity of software.

My specific need to format a System.DateTime-value in a RFC3339-format came when I used one of Google's REST APIs and they required a parameter in the RFC3339-format. Here is the code is the extension-method which provides the functionality of formatting a DateTime as a string in RFC3339-format:

public static string ToRfc3339String(this DateTime dateTime)
{
    return dateTime.ToString("yyyy-MM-dd'T'HH:mm:ss.fffzzz", DateTimeFormatInfo.InvariantInfo);
}

There are many situations when you handle URLs or URIs in applications today, no matter if it's a web-application or not. Often you need to handle absolute URLs, like https://testsite.com/section/page, and relative URLs, like /section/page.html.

To easily convert URLs between absolute and relative, or just ensure these two formats, I created extension-methods for the type System.Uri, which allows you to write code like this:

var absoluteToRelative = new Uri("https://www.test-relative.com/customers/details.html").ToRelative();
// Outputs: "/customers/details.html"

var relativeToAbsolute = new Uri("/orders/id-123/", UriKind.Relative).ToAbsolute("https://www.test-absolute.com");
// Outputs: "https://www.test-absolute.com/orders/id-123/"

The extension-methods which makes this possible are the following:

public static string ToRelative(this Uri uri)
{
    // Null-check

    return uri.IsAbsoluteUri ? uri.PathAndQuery : uri.OriginalString;
}

public static string ToAbsolute(this Uri uri, string baseUrl)
{
    // Null-checks

    var baseUri = new Uri(baseUrl);

    return uri.ToAbsolute(baseUri);
}

public static string ToAbsolute(this Uri uri, Uri baseUri)
{
    // Null-checks

    var relative = uri.ToRelative();

    if (Uri.TryCreate(baseUri, relative, out var absolute))
    {
        return absolute.ToString();
    }

    return uri.IsAbsoluteUri ? uri.ToString() : null;
}

Have you ever wanted to register Autofac and AutoMapper circularly? By this I mean to do the inception of these two things, at the same time, in the same application:

• Register AutoMapper's mappings through Autofac's component-registration for dependency-injection
• Use registered components in Autofac for dependency-injection into AutoMapper's mapped objects

This is actually possible! It's done by providing AutoMapper with Autofac's IComponentContext-object, which is not dependent on if you've registered everything you need in the Autofac component-registrations, before configuring AutoMapper. So you can register more components after registering your AutoMapper-configuration and still access all these in your AutoMapper context when they get resolved later in your code.

We'll start with the code for registering the Autofac-components and follow it with some explaining:

public IContainer RegisterComponents()
{
    var builder = new ContainerBuilder();

    builder.RegisterType<PreMapperComponent>().As<IPreMapperComponent>();

    builder.Register(ConfigureMapper).SingleInstance();

    builder.RegisterType<PostMapperComponent>().As<IPostMapperComponent>();

    return builder.Build();
}

private IMapper ConfigureMapper(IComponentContext context)
{
    var configuration = new MapperConfiguration(config =>
    {
        var ctx = context.Resolve<IComponentContext>();

        config.CreateMap<EntityType, DtoType>()
            .ConstructUsing(_ =>
                new DtoType(ctx.Resolve<IPreMapperComponent>(), ctx.Resolve<IPostMapperComponent>()));
    });

    return configuration.CreateMapper();
}

The method RegisterComponents is included to show a somewhat realistic scenario, and for this case specifically showing that you can register components in Autofac both before and after configuring AutoMapper.

The code var ctx = context.Resolve<IComponentContext>() might look strange, but is crucial for this solution to work. Why not use the context-argument directly in the ConfigureMapper-method? Because it will throw an exception starting with This resolve operation has already ended, and instructs you to resolve IComponentContext again, which is what we're doing here.

Running the AutoMapper-code

Then we run the code using AutoMapper and the mapping of types needing dependency-injection of constructor-parameters:

public static void Run(IContainer container)
{
    var mapper = container.Resolve<IMapper>();

    var source = new EntityType(123, "Test-text", "Test-description");

    var dto = mapper.Map<DtoType>(source);

    dto.RunComponents();
}

The code dto.RunComponents() is the one that executes the injected implementations of the interfaces IPreMapperComponent and IPostMapperComponent used in the type DtoType.

You can find all the code-files involved in this example in this Gist.

This can all also be done through the recommended approach of Modules in Autofac and Profiles in AutoMapper.

If you've ever needed to limit a value between two known limits of values, then you have been looking for Clamping.

Sometimes when you do calculations on values you know that the result should not fall outside two specific values. For example, if your calculating a percentage-value as an int-value, then you know the result should be between 0 and 100.

public int GetPercentage(int val1, int val2)
{
    // TODO: Check for 0 on val2-parameter

    var calculation = val1 / val2;
    var ensuredPercentage = calculation.Clamp(0, 100);
    return ensuredPercentage;
}

This functionality can easily be extended to all classes which inherits from System.IComparable<T>, which are for example all types of numbers like int, double, long and so on, but also DateTime and more.

The following extension-method adds the Clamp-method to all objects of types inheriting from IComparable<T>:

public static T Clamp<T>(this T value, T min, T max)
    where T : IComparable<T>
{
    var comparer = Comparer<T>.Default;

    if (comparer == null)
        throw new ArgumentException($"Failed to get default comparer for type '{typeof(T).FullName}'.");

    var isMinGreaterThanMax = comparer.Compare(min, max) > 0;

    if (isMinGreaterThanMax)
    {
        throw new ArgumentOutOfRangeException(
            nameof(min),
            "Minimum value cannot be larger than maximum value.");
    }

    var isValueLessThanMin = comparer.Compare(value, min) < 0;
    var isValueGreaterThanMax = !isValueLessThanMin && comparer.Compare(value, max) > 0;

    return isValueLessThanMin ? min : (isValueGreaterThanMax ? max : value);
}