C# 9 Record - Read example/summary from positional record

[pixellos]

Minimal fix for most common case of C#9 constructor. https://github.com/domaindrivendev/Swashbuckle.AspNetCore/issues/1920

[pixellos]

@domaindrivendev is there something that needs to be done to get this merged? Or is it no go?

[pixellos]

@Bumping

[LockTar]

This would be very nice to have!

[Naxaliav]

This is very needed :/ Why its not merged yet?

[pixellos]

If there would be any feedback about what to improve, i'd implement it right away - but no contributor was engaged in this thread :( .

[owns]

this is very needed for a project I'm on too - we currently have a separate build we use because of it.

[Naxaliav]

@domaindrivendev any feedback about this PR? Records are commonly used for API contracts since they have easier declaration and better equality. Now basically I am forced to have a copy XmlCommentsSchemaFilter.cs from this contribution at work, since we strongly document everything with openAPI…. If any updates are needed, just let us now… We are actual users of this already. (even though its unofficial)

[paulosincos]

+1 in the line waiting for this improvement hehe

[niemyjski]

Can we get this merged?

[pixellos]

There are some build issues - probably https://github.com/domaindrivendev/Swashbuckle.AspNetCore/pull/2672/files would be predecessor of this RP

[LockTar]

@pixellos You say that #2672 is a predecessor. Any idea when that one will be closed so this will be closed? Because all checks are passing on that PR. What can we do to help?

[pixellos]

Yes, but i haven't got changes from #2672 but from master, on which tests are already failing. Personally, i just did a filter in my project to retrofit this functionality.

[barruka]

I believe it's crucial for the developer community to have this issue resolved, especially since the necessary code to fix it is already available. Documentation is incredibly important when building an API, and it's been three years since the release of .NET 5 with record types. In my opinion, prioritizing the resolution and merging of this issue might be more important than adding new features.

[martincostello]

Thanks for contributing - if you'd like to continue with this pull request, please rebase against the default branch to pick up our new CI.

[pixellos]

Hi, on it :)

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 91.66%. Comparing base (c207be7) to head (f9997fd).

:exclamation: Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2546      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.62%   91.66%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          91       91              
  Lines        2998     3010      +12     
  Branches      514      517       +3     
==========================================
+ Hits         2747     2759      +12     
  Misses        251      251              

Flag	Coverage Δ
Linux	91.66% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	:arrow_up:
Windows	91.66% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	:arrow_up:
macOS	91.66% <100.00%> (+0.03%)	:arrow_up:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[pixellos]

build / windows-latest (pull_request) seems to be transient error - sth wrong with coverlet - as ubuntu succeeded

[martincostello]

Thanks for the fast turnaround! This will be part of the next release (we haven't planned when that will be yet).

If you'd like to consume these changes before then, you can use our pre-release feed in MyGet: https://www.myget.org/gallery/domaindrivendev