Skip to content

Conversation

@MartinGC94
Copy link
Contributor

PR Summary

Fixes the generic type argument parsing so array types don't need additional brackets to be parsed correctly.
So now this: [System.Tuple[System.String[],System.Int32[]]] works like you would expect.
The issue was caused by the parser looking for an assembly qualified name if a comma appeared after an array type, but that's not valid inside unbracketed generic type arguments so a check has been added for that.

PR Context

Fixes #18686
Fixes #9639

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost assigned iSazonov Feb 23, 2023
@iSazonov iSazonov requested a review from vexx32 February 24, 2023 03:49
@iSazonov iSazonov added the CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log label Feb 24, 2023
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Mar 8, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Mar 8, 2023

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 14 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +10 -4
Percentile : 5.6%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +4 -4
.ps1 : +6 -0

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@iSazonov
Copy link
Collaborator

iSazonov commented Apr 1, 2023

@daxian-dbw @SeeminglyScience Friendly ping.

@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Apr 1, 2023
@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Apr 8, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 8, 2023

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw added WG-Engine core PowerShell engine, interpreter, and runtime Needs-Triage The issue is new and needs to be triaged by a work group. labels May 1, 2023
Copy link
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw merged commit 1c8b58c into PowerShell:master May 8, 2023
@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label May 8, 2023
@daxian-dbw
Copy link
Member

Thanks @MartinGC94 for the contribution!

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw assigned daxian-dbw and unassigned iSazonov May 8, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jun 29, 2023

🎉v7.4.0-preview.4 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Extra Small Needs-Triage The issue is new and needs to be triaged by a work group. WG-Engine core PowerShell engine, interpreter, and runtime

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

The first array type in a generic method doesn't work Typename does not parse: [system.tuple[string[],string[]]]

3 participants