Don't hide strings on methods where Exclude = True and ApplyToMember = True.

[PatrickHofman]

Currently method bodies which have Exclude = True on them are still obfuscated.

This pull request will exclude method bodies when Exclude = True and ApplyToMember = True.

More on the repro for the problem this fixes.

Unobfuscated class:

    internal static class SomeClass
    {
        [Obfuscation(Exclude = true, ApplyToMembers = true, Feature = "all")]
        public static void SomeMethod()
        {
            string s = "something";
        }
    }

This is now obfuscated as:

    internal static class SomeClass
    {
        [Obfuscation(Exclude = true, ApplyToMembers = true, Feature = "all")]
        public static void SomeMethod()
        {
            string s = ia.Sdhgcbf();
        }
    }

While it should preserve the strings since Exclude = True and ApplyToMembers = True.

[monty241]

Solved my issue with stack overflow on .NET Core with small stacks due to massive creation of variables for constants in very large methods. Thx

[lextm]

Filters are usually used to control the API surface on what should be changed or remain. Hiding strings, however, does not change API surface. So, it is optional to attach a filter to string hiding. Thus, at this time no plan to accept this pull request.

[PatrickHofman]

The issue at hand here is that very very large assemblies will contain so much constant strings, the number of possible fields in a class is exceeded. Accepting this pull request will significantly lower the number of fields required.

[NazimMertBilgi]

Does this topic work?