Update InputLanguage.cs

[DJm00n]

Streamline InputLanguage.LayoutId logic for clarity and maintainability, preserving existing behavior.

Customer Impact

• No obrevable impact on customers

Regression?

• No

Risk

• Low

Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

:x: Patch coverage is 84.21053% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review. :white_check_mark: Project coverage is 52.01209%. Comparing base (00e4a81) to head (ad3f9bb).

:exclamation: There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (00e4a81) and HEAD (ad3f9bb). Click for more details.

HEAD has 2 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (00e4a81)	HEAD (ad3f9bb)
Debug	3	2
test	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##                main      #13925          +/-   ##
====================================================
- Coverage   77.15465%   52.01209%   -25.14257%     
====================================================
  Files           3276        2064        -1212     
  Lines         645116      287885      -357231     
  Branches       47705       42112        -5593     
====================================================
- Hits          497737      149735      -348002     
+ Misses        143692      135258        -8434     
+ Partials        3687        2892         -795     

Flag	Coverage Δ
Debug	52.01209% <84.21053%> (-25.14257%)	:arrow_down:
integration	18.98986% <0.00000%> (+0.00185%)	:arrow_up:
production	52.01209% <84.21053%> (-0.00568%)	:arrow_down:
test	?
unit	49.43606% <84.21053%> (-0.00506%)	:arrow_down:

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

:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:

• :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• :package: JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[DJm00n]

@JeremyKuhne can you please take a look?

[JeremyKuhne]

@DJm00n Thanks! Note that I'm no longer on the WinForms team. You can still feel free to ping me if there is something that I might have knowledge on.

In this particular case I don't think this change is a good idea:

• This is very hard to unit test (involves a global system resource- the Registry)
• It isn't fixing an issue
• This particular method has been problematic

Outside of this case, we should be ensuring that any changes are well covered in unit tests that come in as a separate PR to ensure that we're not breaking behavior.

That said, this is in @merriemcgaw, @Shyam-Gupta, and @KlausLoeffelmann hands now, I'll let them give their take. :)