Adding Parameters to Annotations Using Rewrite Actions
In this blog post, we will:
- Demonstrate searching and matching annotations
- Amen annotations using mustache templates
Sensei provides the ability to match problematic code patterns and then amend them to agreed implementations. In this example, I am using @Disabled without a parameter as the problematic code pattern.
Disabled Test Annotation
Disabled tests without a specified reason can prove problematic over the long term because we forget why we disabled it.
@Disabled
void thisTestMethodHasNoDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
The risk is that, over time, the code base moves on, the disabled test is not updated in step with the purpose of the code and eventually becomes redundant and irrelevant, and potentially never re-enabled.
During code reviews, we will often point out that it is a good idea to add an explanatory description as the annotation parameter.
@Disabled ("Disabled to demonstrate adding a reason")
void thisTestMethodHasDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
A Sensei Recipe
We can write a recipe to detect when @Disabled is added without explanation and a Quick Fix that reminds us to add the actual reason explaining why we disabled it.
When I think about what I'm going to do, I have to:
- match the Disabled annotation without any parameters
- change the Disabled annotation to have a parameter with marker text "TODO: add a description here"
Create a Warning Recipe
I use Alt+Enter to Create a new Recipe.
Then add the basic descriptive text in the general information.
By making the rule a warning, any matching code is highlighted but not shown as a glaring error.
Find the Annotation
In the recipe editor, I change the Search to match an annotation.
This will highlight all annotations in the preview.
Having done that, I want to filter on the type of annotation.
I could just use Disabled but I fully qualify the class with the package so that it only matches the annotation from JUnit 5. Because the source code is shown in the preview, I can easily copy and paste this in from the actual code to avoid any typos.
I then want to match only annotations without Parameters, and I can use the GUI to do that.
i.e. Search:
search:
annotation:
type: "org.junit.jupiter.api.Disabled"
without:
parameters:
- {}
Create a Rewrite Quick Fix Action
For my QuickFix I will use a rewrite action.
I use the Show Variables functionality to show me the Mustache variables and preview the contents.
And then I add the extra code needed to create the place marker comment.
i.e. QuickFix:
availableFixes:
- name: "Add a todo comment parameter"
actions:
- rewrite:
to: "{{{ . }}}(\"TODO: add a description here\")"
target: "self"
Sensei in Action
We have created a short video showing the recipe creation process in action.
Summary
When building a rewrite Quick Fix, it is easier when we can search for the code element that we want to rewrite, because it is then the self entity we can act on.
In this example, I used a rewrite action to amend the Annotation. Rewrite is a general-purpose action that can apply to any code element and is a good default to explore.
Learn how to use Sensei to match problematic code patterns and then amend them to agreed implementations with examples of annotation matching.
Alan Richardson has more than twenty years of professional IT experience, working as a developer and at every level of the testing hierarchy from Tester through to Head of Testing. Head of Developer Relations at Secure Code Warrior, he works directly with teams, to improve the development of quality secure code. Alan is the author of four books including “Dear Evil Tester”, and “Java For Testers”. Alan has also created online training courses to help people learn Technical Web Testing and Selenium WebDriver with Java. Alan posts his writing and training videos on SeleniumSimplified.com, EvilTester.com, JavaForTesters.com, and CompendiumDev.co.uk.
Secure Code Warrior is here for your organization to help you secure code across the entire software development lifecycle and create a culture in which cybersecurity is top of mind. Whether you’re an AppSec Manager, Developer, CISO, or anyone involved in security, we can help your organization reduce risks associated with insecure code.
Book a demoAlan Richardson has more than twenty years of professional IT experience, working as a developer and at every level of the testing hierarchy from Tester through to Head of Testing. Head of Developer Relations at Secure Code Warrior, he works directly with teams, to improve the development of quality secure code. Alan is the author of four books including “Dear Evil Tester”, and “Java For Testers”. Alan has also created online training courses to help people learn Technical Web Testing and Selenium WebDriver with Java. Alan posts his writing and training videos on SeleniumSimplified.com, EvilTester.com, JavaForTesters.com, and CompendiumDev.co.uk.
In this blog post, we will:
- Demonstrate searching and matching annotations
- Amen annotations using mustache templates
Sensei provides the ability to match problematic code patterns and then amend them to agreed implementations. In this example, I am using @Disabled without a parameter as the problematic code pattern.
Disabled Test Annotation
Disabled tests without a specified reason can prove problematic over the long term because we forget why we disabled it.
@Disabled
void thisTestMethodHasNoDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
The risk is that, over time, the code base moves on, the disabled test is not updated in step with the purpose of the code and eventually becomes redundant and irrelevant, and potentially never re-enabled.
During code reviews, we will often point out that it is a good idea to add an explanatory description as the annotation parameter.
@Disabled ("Disabled to demonstrate adding a reason")
void thisTestMethodHasDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
A Sensei Recipe
We can write a recipe to detect when @Disabled is added without explanation and a Quick Fix that reminds us to add the actual reason explaining why we disabled it.
When I think about what I'm going to do, I have to:
- match the Disabled annotation without any parameters
- change the Disabled annotation to have a parameter with marker text "TODO: add a description here"
Create a Warning Recipe
I use Alt+Enter to Create a new Recipe.
Then add the basic descriptive text in the general information.
By making the rule a warning, any matching code is highlighted but not shown as a glaring error.
Find the Annotation
In the recipe editor, I change the Search to match an annotation.
This will highlight all annotations in the preview.
Having done that, I want to filter on the type of annotation.
I could just use Disabled but I fully qualify the class with the package so that it only matches the annotation from JUnit 5. Because the source code is shown in the preview, I can easily copy and paste this in from the actual code to avoid any typos.
I then want to match only annotations without Parameters, and I can use the GUI to do that.
i.e. Search:
search:
annotation:
type: "org.junit.jupiter.api.Disabled"
without:
parameters:
- {}
Create a Rewrite Quick Fix Action
For my QuickFix I will use a rewrite action.
I use the Show Variables functionality to show me the Mustache variables and preview the contents.
And then I add the extra code needed to create the place marker comment.
i.e. QuickFix:
availableFixes:
- name: "Add a todo comment parameter"
actions:
- rewrite:
to: "{{{ . }}}(\"TODO: add a description here\")"
target: "self"
Sensei in Action
We have created a short video showing the recipe creation process in action.
Summary
When building a rewrite Quick Fix, it is easier when we can search for the code element that we want to rewrite, because it is then the self entity we can act on.
In this example, I used a rewrite action to amend the Annotation. Rewrite is a general-purpose action that can apply to any code element and is a good default to explore.
In this blog post, we will:
- Demonstrate searching and matching annotations
- Amen annotations using mustache templates
Sensei provides the ability to match problematic code patterns and then amend them to agreed implementations. In this example, I am using @Disabled without a parameter as the problematic code pattern.
Disabled Test Annotation
Disabled tests without a specified reason can prove problematic over the long term because we forget why we disabled it.
@Disabled
void thisTestMethodHasNoDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
The risk is that, over time, the code base moves on, the disabled test is not updated in step with the purpose of the code and eventually becomes redundant and irrelevant, and potentially never re-enabled.
During code reviews, we will often point out that it is a good idea to add an explanatory description as the annotation parameter.
@Disabled ("Disabled to demonstrate adding a reason")
void thisTestMethodHasDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
A Sensei Recipe
We can write a recipe to detect when @Disabled is added without explanation and a Quick Fix that reminds us to add the actual reason explaining why we disabled it.
When I think about what I'm going to do, I have to:
- match the Disabled annotation without any parameters
- change the Disabled annotation to have a parameter with marker text "TODO: add a description here"
Create a Warning Recipe
I use Alt+Enter to Create a new Recipe.
Then add the basic descriptive text in the general information.
By making the rule a warning, any matching code is highlighted but not shown as a glaring error.
Find the Annotation
In the recipe editor, I change the Search to match an annotation.
This will highlight all annotations in the preview.
Having done that, I want to filter on the type of annotation.
I could just use Disabled but I fully qualify the class with the package so that it only matches the annotation from JUnit 5. Because the source code is shown in the preview, I can easily copy and paste this in from the actual code to avoid any typos.
I then want to match only annotations without Parameters, and I can use the GUI to do that.
i.e. Search:
search:
annotation:
type: "org.junit.jupiter.api.Disabled"
without:
parameters:
- {}
Create a Rewrite Quick Fix Action
For my QuickFix I will use a rewrite action.
I use the Show Variables functionality to show me the Mustache variables and preview the contents.
And then I add the extra code needed to create the place marker comment.
i.e. QuickFix:
availableFixes:
- name: "Add a todo comment parameter"
actions:
- rewrite:
to: "{{{ . }}}(\"TODO: add a description here\")"
target: "self"
Sensei in Action
We have created a short video showing the recipe creation process in action.
Summary
When building a rewrite Quick Fix, it is easier when we can search for the code element that we want to rewrite, because it is then the self entity we can act on.
In this example, I used a rewrite action to amend the Annotation. Rewrite is a general-purpose action that can apply to any code element and is a good default to explore.
Click on the link below and download the PDF of this resource.
Secure Code Warrior is here for your organization to help you secure code across the entire software development lifecycle and create a culture in which cybersecurity is top of mind. Whether you’re an AppSec Manager, Developer, CISO, or anyone involved in security, we can help your organization reduce risks associated with insecure code.
View reportBook a demoAlan Richardson has more than twenty years of professional IT experience, working as a developer and at every level of the testing hierarchy from Tester through to Head of Testing. Head of Developer Relations at Secure Code Warrior, he works directly with teams, to improve the development of quality secure code. Alan is the author of four books including “Dear Evil Tester”, and “Java For Testers”. Alan has also created online training courses to help people learn Technical Web Testing and Selenium WebDriver with Java. Alan posts his writing and training videos on SeleniumSimplified.com, EvilTester.com, JavaForTesters.com, and CompendiumDev.co.uk.
In this blog post, we will:
- Demonstrate searching and matching annotations
- Amen annotations using mustache templates
Sensei provides the ability to match problematic code patterns and then amend them to agreed implementations. In this example, I am using @Disabled without a parameter as the problematic code pattern.
Disabled Test Annotation
Disabled tests without a specified reason can prove problematic over the long term because we forget why we disabled it.
@Disabled
void thisTestMethodHasNoDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
The risk is that, over time, the code base moves on, the disabled test is not updated in step with the purpose of the code and eventually becomes redundant and irrelevant, and potentially never re-enabled.
During code reviews, we will often point out that it is a good idea to add an explanatory description as the annotation parameter.
@Disabled ("Disabled to demonstrate adding a reason")
void thisTestMethodHasDisabledReason(){
Assertions.fail("This test is disabled and should not run");
}
A Sensei Recipe
We can write a recipe to detect when @Disabled is added without explanation and a Quick Fix that reminds us to add the actual reason explaining why we disabled it.
When I think about what I'm going to do, I have to:
- match the Disabled annotation without any parameters
- change the Disabled annotation to have a parameter with marker text "TODO: add a description here"
Create a Warning Recipe
I use Alt+Enter to Create a new Recipe.
Then add the basic descriptive text in the general information.
By making the rule a warning, any matching code is highlighted but not shown as a glaring error.
Find the Annotation
In the recipe editor, I change the Search to match an annotation.
This will highlight all annotations in the preview.
Having done that, I want to filter on the type of annotation.
I could just use Disabled but I fully qualify the class with the package so that it only matches the annotation from JUnit 5. Because the source code is shown in the preview, I can easily copy and paste this in from the actual code to avoid any typos.
I then want to match only annotations without Parameters, and I can use the GUI to do that.
i.e. Search:
search:
annotation:
type: "org.junit.jupiter.api.Disabled"
without:
parameters:
- {}
Create a Rewrite Quick Fix Action
For my QuickFix I will use a rewrite action.
I use the Show Variables functionality to show me the Mustache variables and preview the contents.
And then I add the extra code needed to create the place marker comment.
i.e. QuickFix:
availableFixes:
- name: "Add a todo comment parameter"
actions:
- rewrite:
to: "{{{ . }}}(\"TODO: add a description here\")"
target: "self"
Sensei in Action
We have created a short video showing the recipe creation process in action.
Summary
When building a rewrite Quick Fix, it is easier when we can search for the code element that we want to rewrite, because it is then the self entity we can act on.
In this example, I used a rewrite action to amend the Annotation. Rewrite is a general-purpose action that can apply to any code element and is a good default to explore.
Table of contents
Alan Richardson has more than twenty years of professional IT experience, working as a developer and at every level of the testing hierarchy from Tester through to Head of Testing. Head of Developer Relations at Secure Code Warrior, he works directly with teams, to improve the development of quality secure code. Alan is the author of four books including “Dear Evil Tester”, and “Java For Testers”. Alan has also created online training courses to help people learn Technical Web Testing and Selenium WebDriver with Java. Alan posts his writing and training videos on SeleniumSimplified.com, EvilTester.com, JavaForTesters.com, and CompendiumDev.co.uk.
Secure Code Warrior is here for your organization to help you secure code across the entire software development lifecycle and create a culture in which cybersecurity is top of mind. Whether you’re an AppSec Manager, Developer, CISO, or anyone involved in security, we can help your organization reduce risks associated with insecure code.
Book a demoDownloadResources to get you started
Resources to get you started
OWASP Top 10 For LLM Applications: What’s New, Changed, and How to Stay Secure
Stay ahead in securing LLM applications with the latest OWASP Top 10 updates. Discover what's new, what’s changed, and how Secure Code Warrior equips you with up-to-date learning resources to mitigate risks in Generative AI.
Trust Score Reveals the Value of Secure-by-Design Upskilling Initiatives
Our research has shown that secure code training works. Trust Score, using an algorithm drawing on more than 20 million learning data points from work by more than 250,000 learners at over 600 organizations, reveals its effectiveness in driving down vulnerabilities and how to make the initiative even more effective.
Reactive Versus Preventive Security: Prevention Is a Better Cure
The idea of bringing preventive security to legacy code and systems at the same time as newer applications can seem daunting, but a Secure-by-Design approach, enforced by upskilling developers, can apply security best practices to those systems. It’s the best chance many organizations have of improving their security postures.
The Benefits of Benchmarking Security Skills for Developers
The growing focus on secure code and Secure-by-Design principles requires developers to be trained in cybersecurity from the start of the SDLC, with tools like Secure Code Warrior’s Trust Score helping measure and improve their progress.