ijklam

Results 68 comments of ijklam

I found that in ILSpy, `member val private A = 0 with get, set` and `member val A = 0 with internal get, private set` both produce a internal property....

> @Tangent-90 ugh, it seems you're facing some issues with tests post merge, sorry about that. Let me know if I can help resolving those. Just some boring error messages...

@vzarytovskii Still has a test failed. ``` Failed FSharpChecker.TransparentCompiler.File is not checked twice [291 ms] Error Message: Assert.Equal() Failure Expected: FSharpList [Weakened, Requested, Started, Finished] Actual: FSharpList [Weakened, Requested, Started]...

> > By the way, access modifiers before getter and setter will be ignored and produce a warning in signature files > > Why? Would it be possible to support...

`protected` also displayed in tooltip ![图片](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/assets/43789618/e054071c-e5a8-4d49-8aa2-27856f769357)

> Could you add a test to https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/blob/711de175bf0c7ddfda4005c3334606b90bb11146/tests/FSharp.Compiler.ComponentTests/Signatures/SigGenerationRoundTripTests.fs, please?你能 https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/blob/711de175bf0c7ddfda4005c3334606b90bb11146/tests/FSharp.Compiler.ComponentTests/Signatures/SigGenerationRoundTripTests.fs 添加一个测试吗? > > That will ensure the generated signature is valid for the implementation.这将确保生成的签名对实现有效。 [added](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/blob/fd2caaa5571e5e48ad1fd5ab1fb1cde495d710bc/tests/FSharp.Compiler.ComponentTests/Signatures/TestCasesForGenerationRoundTrip/property_access_modifiers.fsx)

I make the new signature generation way under the `preview` flag. Then some tests with signature hardcoded into error msg are OK with net8.0 (current version) but not OK under...

add a new error to disallow access modifiers in an SRTP constraint ![图片](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/assets/43789618/41246da9-530c-46bb-abb8-4d4f53312525) and will raise a warning in

> @Tangent-90 , will you have time to fix the conflict here? It's pretty simple, but probably best to do it locally and have the .xlf files be generated again...

> Hey @Tangent-90, awesome work! For posterity, can you link the RFC and the original discussion in the top (i.e., in your original description)? It's kinda hidden behind several other...