Conversation
|
Is there some analyzer/code fix to enforce this or did you manually find and fix these? If the former, can/should we enforce it on build, at least for the IDE layers to start with? |
|
I used our analyzer. :-) Enforcing seems totally fine to me! |
|
Thanks, can we do the enforcement as part of this PR? |
Sure :) |
| dotnet_diagnostic.RS0102.severity = none | ||
|
|
||
| # IDE0170: Prefer extended property pattern | ||
| dotnet_diagnostic.IDE0170.severity = suggestion |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
only compiler change. moving this back to a suggestion instead of a warning as i believe the compiler prefers not to enable automated style analyzers? @jcouv to confirm?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Note: if compiler is ok turning this on, i'm happy to remove this line and fix up the remaining hits in the compiler layer.
|
@dotnet/roslyn-compiler for tiny non-code change. |
| ReturnType: { SpecialType: SpecialType.System_Boolean }, | ||
| Parameters: { Length: 0 }, | ||
| ReturnType.SpecialType: SpecialType.System_Boolean, | ||
| Parameters.Length: 0, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❔ Just wondering, is there a new pattern we would recommend for this, or is this still the cleanest?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
when list patterns come out, one might prefer Parameters: []. I could see it both ways.
|
Thanks all! |
No description provided.