-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.1k
Fix TypeName.GetReflectionType() to work when the TypeName instance represents a generic type definition within a GenericTypeName
#24985
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
fca8dfe
Set the cached type for `GenericTypeName.TypeName` as needed when the…
daxian-dbw fd6009a
Minor update on test name
daxian-dbw 92cf722
Pass generic argument count to `TypeName` when constructing a `Generi…
daxian-dbw bf7f23a
Add more comments
daxian-dbw f6a956c
Minor update
daxian-dbw be17041
Add a check to the new constructor
daxian-dbw File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Usually, we expect a constructor to throw an exception if the argument is unexpected. But here we perform a correction of the argument. It's amazing. I'm afraid this may provoke accidental misuse of this constructor in the future. At the very least, it would be good to add a comment with examples of the scenarios we address and explaining why this correction is needed in this place.
Alternatively, we could perform a check at the call location and pass the correct arguments.
It could be even better to use a template like
private static TypeName TypeName.CreateAlternativeGenericTypeName()with a comprehensive description.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This "try alternate name" thing happens in multiple places, which is common when dealing with generic type resolution. Comments were added in the
GetReflectionType()to explain why we only fall back to alternate name even ifgenericArgumentCountis set.As for the scenario for using this constructor, the XML comment calls it out and it's also easy to understand by looking at where it's used. So, I don't think more comments are needed.
I can add a check to throw when
genericArgumentCountis a negative value.