Skip to content

Allow the PSGetMemberBinder to handle ByRef property#16956

Merged
daxian-dbw merged 1 commit intoPowerShell:masterfrom
daxian-dbw:byref
Mar 4, 2022
Merged

Allow the PSGetMemberBinder to handle ByRef property#16956
daxian-dbw merged 1 commit intoPowerShell:masterfrom
daxian-dbw:byref

Conversation

@daxian-dbw
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw commented Mar 4, 2022

PR Summary

Fix #14632

Allow the PSGetMemberBinder to handle ByRef property.
There is no way to work with ByRef type directly in expression tree, so we turn to reflection in this case.

PR Checklist

@ghost ghost assigned iSazonov Mar 4, 2022
SeeminglyScience
SeeminglyScience approved these changes Mar 4, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@SeeminglyScience SeeminglyScience left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah this LGTM, I think it's the right solution 🎉

I do wish we could hook this up to the set binder. But unless PropertyInfo.SetValue supports it for ref values now (last time I looked it didn't Edit: and still doesn't) that probably isn't possible atm.

Very happy we can at least get the value though, well done!

Side note, I did also briefly try a intermediary static T Deref<T>(ref T value) => value method but that's a bust unfortunately

image

@daxian-dbw
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

daxian-dbw commented Mar 4, 2022

I can see there is a possibility that we run into a similar issue with a method that has a ByRef return type. It would be more complex, but I guess can be handled in a similar way. We will deal with it when it comes up 😄

PaulHigin
PaulHigin approved these changes Mar 4, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@PaulHigin PaulHigin 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 closed this Mar 4, 2022
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw reopened this Mar 4, 2022
@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated
Copy link
Copy Markdown

pull-request-quantifier-deprecated bot commented Mar 4, 2022

This PR has 25 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       : +24 -1
Percentile : 10%

Total files changed: 4

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +12 -1
.ps1 : +12 -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 detetcted.
  • 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.

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw merged commit a3c4a16 into PowerShell:master Mar 4, 2022
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw deleted the byref branch March 4, 2022 23:01
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw assigned daxian-dbw and unassigned iSazonov Mar 4, 2022
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw added the CL-Engine Indicates that a PR should be marked as an engine change in the Change Log label Mar 4, 2022
@ghost
Copy link
Copy Markdown

ghost commented Mar 21, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.3 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

@ghost ghost mentioned this pull request Mar 21, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@SeeminglyScience SeeminglyScience SeeminglyScience approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@PaulHigin PaulHigin PaulHigin approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw

Labels

CL-Engine Indicates that a PR should be marked as an engine change in the Change Log Extra Small

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

format-default: No coercion operator is defined

4 participants

@daxian-dbw @PaulHigin @SeeminglyScience @iSazonov