Speculative changes to PrimaryConstructorBaseTypeSyntax #75546
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
dotnet-issue-labeler
bot
added
Area-IDE
untriaged
dotnet-policy-service
bot
added
Community
Orachor
changed the title
CyrusNajmabadi
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2024
|
Thanks!! |
This was referenced Oct 22, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As per the discussion in #75026 a
PrimaryConstructorBaseTypeSyntaxshould only be used for speculation if we are making changes to it'sArgumentListand not the type definition part. This PR makes it so aPrimaryConstructorBaseTypeSyntaxcan be used as aSemanticRootOfOriginalExpressiononly if the original expression we are speculating on is inside the argument list.Closes #75026