Fix #4610 net10.0 follow-up: enum-aware Contains path for MemoryExtensions

[jeremydmiller]

Context

#4610 fixed values.Contains(p.EnumMember) against an EnumStorage.AsString document member by routing the case through EnumIsOneOfWhereFragment in EnumerableContains.Parse. That worked on net9.0 locally and in CI, but the regression test file is now failing on net10.0 in CI for both open PRs (#4613, #4615) with the same Writing values of 'YourEnum[]' is not supported for parameters having NpgsqlDbType '-2147483639' shape from the original bug.

Root cause

On net10.0 the C# compiler resolves array.Contains(x) to MemoryExtensions.Contains via the implicit T[] → ReadOnlySpan<T> conversion — not Enumerable.Contains. Marten's parser registry has a dedicated MemoryExtensionsContains parser at LinqParsing.cs:52 (ahead of EnumerableContains at line 53) precisely to handle that case, and its Parse had the same raw-CommandParameter-from-enum-array bug:

// MemoryExtensionsContains.cs:33 (pre-fix)
return new IsOneOfFilter(collectionMember, new CommandParameter(constant.Value));

#4610's fix only patched EnumerableContains — MemoryExtensionsContains was missed because the local test runs were on net9.0 only.

Fix

Mirror the same enum-aware branch into MemoryExtensionsContains.Parse:

if (collectionMember.MemberType.IsEnum && constant.Value is not null)
{
    var arrayValue = constant.Value is Array
        ? constant.Value
        : ((IEnumerable)constant.Value).Cast<object>().ToArray();

    return new EnumIsOneOfWhereFragment(
        arrayValue,
        options.Serializer().EnumStorage,
        collectionMember.TypedLocator);
}

The existing Bug_enum_asstring_array_contains regression tests already cover both parsers — they target the user-facing shape (values.Contains(p.Status)), and each .NET version routes that shape to a different parser.

Verified

• Bug_enum_asstring_array_contains: 6/6 pass on net9.0
• Bug_enum_asstring_array_contains: 6/6 pass on net10.0 ← the regression
• Full LinqTests on net10.0: 1269 passed, 0 failed

Once this lands, the CI failures on #4613 and #4615 should clear with a rerun (they're not touching either parser, just running into the same flaky net10 fallout).

🤖 Generated with Claude Code