AlekseyTs
AlekseyTs
@cston, @dotnet/roslyn-compiler For the second review.
> Assert.Equal("Base..ctor(System.Int32 X, System.Int32 Y)", model.GetSymbolInfo(baseWithargs).Symbol.ToTestDisplayString()); > Is this testing a different GetSymbolInfo() You are correct. The original test for records has the same "problem". --- In reply to: [1347324742](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/pull/65899#issuecomment-1347324742)...
> Assert.Equal("Base..ctor(System.Int32 X, System.Int32 Y)", model.GetSymbolInfo(baseWithargs).Symbol.ToTestDisplayString()); I think that we are missing a public API that we meant to test. I will add it, but preferably in a separate PR...
> Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_BadXMLRef, "I1").WithArguments("I1").WithLocation(3, 49), > Is this warning expected? Is the cref not valid? Yes. See the same warning produced for a regular method below. --- In reply to: [1347537920](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/pull/65899#issuecomment-1347537920)...
> case "System.Runtime.CompilerServices.IsExternalInit": > Are these "IsExternalInit" cases hit? Probably not --- In reply to: [1347534571](https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/pull/65899#issuecomment-1347534571) [](http://example.com/codeflow?ancestors=1347534571,1347534571) --- Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Semantic/Semantics/PrimaryConstructorTests.cs:4781 in 47bf749. [](commit_id = 47bf749773b240a4f1873c5097655b4b13e6ebab, deletion_comment = False)
@cston >> Assert.Equal("Base..ctor(System.Int32 X, System.Int32 Y)", model.GetSymbolInfo(baseWithargs).Symbol.ToTestDisplayString()); >>Is this testing a different `GetSymbolInfo()` overload to the line above? (It looks like both test `GetSymbolInfo(SyntaxNode, CancellationToken)`.) Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Semantic/Semantics/PrimaryConstructorTests.cs:909 in 47bf749....
> Enable CA1052 (static holder types should be static) Why would we want to do this? I see nothing wrong in a non-static type with only static explicitly declared members.
> The analyzer caught cases where the class should really have been static. #65909 I do not think there was a real harm there, even if we decided to approve...
@Youssef1313 > Do you want me to revert changes under Compilers too or they are good to go? In my opinion, all changes that are not fixing "real" problems should...
Done with review pass (commit 2)