Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

C# 8 nullable reference type support #115

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 2, 2019
Merged

C# 8 nullable reference type support #115

merged 1 commit into from Nov 2, 2019

Conversation

sungam3r
Copy link
Member

@sungam3r sungam3r commented Nov 2, 2019

C# 8 nullable reference type support
volatile without modreq
fixes #54
fixes #108
fixes #107
readme note + .editorconfig
unmanaged and notnull constraints

This is final rebased and squashed version of #102

C# 8 nullable reference type support
volatile without modreq
fixes #108
fixes #107
readme note + .editorconfig
unmanaged and notnull constraints
@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
namespace PublicApiGenerator
{
internal static class CSharpAlias
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm a fan of this change. 'Alias' means something specific in C#, so I'd call it CSharpTypeKeyword or something.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Maybe

@danielmarbach danielmarbach merged commit 6c8d8d7 into PublicApiGenerator:master Nov 2, 2019
@danielmarbach
Copy link
Member

Honestly in other circumstances, I would not have taken this squashed version because it contains unrelated things bundled into one commit. Given that you went through so many hoops of getting this done I hesitated to play out that card and went with pulling it

@sungam3r sungam3r deleted the Nullable branch November 2, 2019 17:50
@sungam3r
Copy link
Member Author

sungam3r commented Nov 2, 2019

I understand that. I am not happy with such a swelling of the code.

@jnm2
Copy link
Contributor

jnm2 commented Nov 2, 2019

It's a bigger burden for the PR author to make more incremental, standalone changes, but I think it's worth it for everyone involved. Reviewers can follow what's happening so much more easily, and the PR author has to think through the work in a different way which I think pushes them to choose better kinds of changes.

@danielmarbach danielmarbach added this to the 10.0.0 milestone Nov 27, 2019
@danielmarbach danielmarbach mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2019
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants