Fixed missing parameters in api footprint

[bytewizer]

Description

• Fixed a missing parameters api in the GetServiceOrCreateInstance method.
• Corrected a source code formatting issue in the ServiceProviderEngine.

Motivation and Context

Could not pass parameters into the GetServiceOrCreateInstance method.

How Has This Been Tested?

I could not test as I'm getting the exact same error as I did in this issue.
nanoframework/Home#1129

Screenshots

Types of changes

• Improvement (non-breaking change that improves a feature, code or algorithm)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue with code or algorithm)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality to code)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• Config and build (change in the configuration and build system, has no impact on code or features)
• Dependencies (update dependencies and changes associated, has no impact on code or features)
• Unit Tests (add new Unit Test(s) or improved existing one(s), has no impact on code or features)
• Documentation (changes or updates in the documentation, has no impact on code or features)

Checklist:

• My code follows the code style of this project (only if there are changes in source code).
• My changes require an update to the documentation (there are changes that require the docs website to be updated).
• I have updated the documentation accordingly (the changes require an update on the docs in this repo).
• I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
• I have tested everything locally and all new and existing tests passed (only if there are changes in source code).
• I have added new tests to cover my changes.

[josesimoes]

@bytewizer this would be another PR, but you can fix the local run of unit tests by following these:

1. https://github.com/nanoframework/nanoFramework.TestFramework#usage-of-net-nanoframework-test-framework
   (look at the 2nd print screen)

2. Migrate the Unit Test project following Fix running unit tests from within VS nanoFramework.Json#249

[bytewizer]

@josesimoes - Thanks! Using the screenshots in #1 I was able to successfully build and run all test cases. I also looked at all three files in #2 and confirmed that the changes were already made in all three files. I think everything looks good and is working as expected.

[Ellerbach]

Looks good to me especially if you managed to test it :-)