fxcop CA2213 error in vs2010

Question

I have the following code: A disposable class that contains two disposable members. One of them is being initialized using new() method, and the other using static factory method. I Also have static code analisys rules, with CA2213 as error.

    public class DisposableClass : IDisposable
{
    private WebClient m_DisposableMember1;

    public WebClient DisposableMember1
    {
        get
        {
            if (m_DisposableMember1 == null)
            {
                m_DisposableMember1 = new WebClient();
            }
            return m_DisposableMember1;
        }
    }

    private WebClient m_DisposableMember2;

    public WebClient DisposableMember2
    {
        get
        {
            if (m_DisposableMember2 == null)
            {
                m_DisposableMember2 = Factory.Create();
            }
            return m_DisposableMember2;
        }
    }


    #region Finalize/Dispose Pattern
    private bool m_IsDisposed = false;

    //Implement IDisposable.
    public void Dispose()
    {
        Dispose(true);
        GC.SuppressFinalize(this);
    }

    ~DisposableClass()
    {
        Dispose(false);
    }

    protected virtual void Dispose(bool disposing)
    {
        if (!m_IsDisposed)
        {
            if (disposing)
            {
                DisposableMember1.Dispose();
                // DisposableMember2 in not disposed and not notified by fxCop
            }

            m_IsDisposed = true;
        }
    }
    #endregion Finalize/Dispose Pattern

}

This is the simple factory class:

    public static class Factory
{
    public static WebClient Create()
    {
        return new WebClient();
    }
}

When I call the Dispose() method of the DisposableMember1 property, I get CA2213. When I call the Dispose() method of the m_DisposableMember1 member, I don't get this error.

More over, I don't get this error for m_DisposableMember2 (Wich was initialized using the static factory), and it is not being disposed.

Does anybody familiar with this issue? What can cause this behavior?

Answer 1

CA2213 is not particularly aggressive about identifying fields that ought to be disposed. Amongst other potential problems, it only considers fields that are directly assigned from a constructor invocation. Assignment of a field value via a property or from a source other than a constructor invocation do not result in the target field being included in the pool of "should be disposed" fields by the rule.