Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for function pointer types#80983
Merged
CyrusNajmabadi merged 8 commits intomainfrom Nov 3, 2025
Merged
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for function pointer types#80983CyrusNajmabadi merged 8 commits intomainfrom
CyrusNajmabadi merged 8 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
Contributor
|
@copilot check normal pointers as well. |
Co-authored-by: CyrusNajmabadi <4564579+CyrusNajmabadi@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot
AI
changed the title
[WIP] Fix invalid code generation for function pointer types
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for function pointer types
Nov 2, 2025
Co-authored-by: CyrusNajmabadi <4564579+CyrusNajmabadi@users.noreply.github.com>
Contributor
Author
Copilot
AI
changed the title
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for function pointer types
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for pointer and function pointer types
Nov 2, 2025
src/Features/CSharpTest/IntroduceVariable/IntroduceVariableTests.cs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: CyrusNajmabadi <4564579+CyrusNajmabadi@users.noreply.github.com>
| case IPointerTypeSymbol pointerType: | ||
| type = pointerType.PointedAtType; | ||
| continue; | ||
| case IPointerTypeSymbol: |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@copilot undo the change to pointers. If the user has Customer* we want to still make that as if it was just Customer. Add tests for this as well and add a 'why, not what's comment for this in the code
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done in b81b069. Restored pointer unwrapping so Customer* generates "customer". Added "why" comments explaining that normal pointers unwrap to get meaningful names while function pointers use the default. Updated test to use Customer* → customer.
Co-authored-by: CyrusNajmabadi <4564579+CyrusNajmabadi@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot
AI
changed the title
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for pointer and function pointer types
Fix "Introduce local" generating invalid code for function pointer types
Nov 2, 2025
CyrusNajmabadi
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2025
…ce-local-code-gen
JoeRobich
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2025
This was referenced Nov 4, 2025
This was referenced Nov 6, 2025
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
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.
Fixes the "Introduce local" refactoring generating invalid code for function pointer types by using the type's display string as the variable name (e.g.,
delegate*<void> delegate*<void> = field;).Changes
ITypeSymbolExtensions.CreateParameterName: Added case forIFunctionPointerTypeSymbolto return default parameter name "value" instead of type display stringCustomer*continue to unwrap to the pointed-at type to generate meaningful names (e.g.,Customer*→customer)TestFunctionPointerTypeandTestPointerTypecovering both function pointers and custom pointer typesExample
Before:
After:
Fixes #80982
Original prompt
💬 We'd love your input! Share your thoughts on Copilot coding agent in our 2 minute survey.