@jjonescz Would you maybe have a moment to take a look?

We should add similar set of tests for new extension blocks. Should be fine to do that in the same files #Closed

Probably also some changes are wanted for the new extension members (as they currently have the same check as modified in this pr and there is nothing in the proposal that would hint for that), gonne create an issue as soon as this pr is closed/merged

I think we should simply go ahead and fix extension members too. Extension members and classic extension methods should be compatible. In other words, it should be possible to convert a classic extension method to an instance method of an extension block. I think the spec mentions the compatibility requirement.

The fact that the logic is duplicated is not a coincidence. #Closed

Done with review pass (commit 9) #Closed

Done with review pass (commit 20)

        if (op is ">" or "<" or ">=" or "<=" or "==" or "!=")

Always true now? #Closed

Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit3/Semantics/ExtensionOperatorsTests.cs:19538 in 9138d89. [](commit_id = 9138d89, deletion_comment = False)

        if (op is ">" or "<" or ">=" or "<=" or "==" or "!=")

Always true now? #Closed

Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit3/Semantics/ExtensionOperatorsTests.cs:19615 in 9138d89. [](commit_id = 9138d89, deletion_comment = False)

Done with review pass (commit 23)

@dotnet/roslyn-compiler For a second review on a community PR

Would it be ready to merge?

Thanks @stbau04!