Jonathon Marolf
Jonathon Marolf
> Will this break analyzers/codefixes? that is entirely dependent on the compiler implementation, but new language versions are always allowed to break analyzers. Consider when expression-bodied-members were added. If you...
My views are basically the same as @HaloFour 's. I think semantically contextual keywords make a lot of sense in theory but add developer complexity and overhead for little benefit.
> Consider the work we're doing to support field inside properties in C# 10. For clarification: this proposal explicitly states that cases like this should keep working as they do,...
> Right. but the problem with that is that it direclty goes against design goals we have for these features. for example, we want you to just be able to...
> So, in the case of some keywords (var, record, etc.) i'm actually ok with us taking over and saying: yeah, at thsi point this is ours. Reasonable codebases won't...
Looks like we build and restore completely different projects depending on the presence of the `BuildVsix` property: https://github.com/dotnet/razor-tooling/blob/1b38348c65e67a844e6691a26cabc95eac622036/eng/Build.props#L9-L11
If we are going to combine these builds then we should remove this property and instead have Razor.sln contain everything. If not building the vsix was originally done for perf...
hmm, I don't understand why we build twice. the `vs` msbuild engine should be a super-set of the `dotnet` msbuild engine. We should be able to do everything in a...
getting the same exception
removing provider `641d7f6c-481c-42e8-ab7e-d18dc5e5cb9e` fixed this for me