- 
                Notifications
    You must be signed in to change notification settings 
- Fork 5.2k
Make Options source gen support Validation attributes having constructor with params Parameter #91915
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
          
     Merged
      
      
            tarekgh
  merged 2 commits into
  dotnet:main
from
tarekgh:MakeOptionsSourceGenSupportValidationAttributesHaveConstructorsWithParams
  
      
      
   
  Sep 12, 2023 
      
    
  
     Merged
                    Make Options source gen support Validation attributes having constructor with params Parameter #91915
Changes from all commits
      Commits
    
    
            Show all changes
          
          
            2 commits
          
        
        Select commit
          Hold shift + click to select a range
      
      
    File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
          Failed to load comments.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Jump to
        
          Jump to file
        
      
      
          Failed to load files.   
        
        
          
      Loading
        
  Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  
    
      This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
      Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
    
  
  
    
              
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
  Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
  Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
  Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
  You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
  Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
  This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
  Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
  Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
  Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
  Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
  
    
  
    
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably too much of a niche scenario to consider here, but could this logic be tripped up by something like the following?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We can consider that in .NET 9.0 as I want to limit the changes, we are porting to .NET 8.0.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's actually not a valid attribute parameter type if you want to apply the attribute (could be interesting for testing, but I gather this generator only observes applied attributes).
https://sharplab.io/#v2:D4AQTAjAsAUCDMACciCyBPAagQwDYEsATbAF3wHsA7AQRJICd8AjAVxIFNEAuRWh5tpwDesRGORIMOAsTJU+jVhwAUAB2z1sAWwDOifJRIBtALqnEANzwt2OgJSIhiAL6xXMWEal4ipCjTpFQWVKdgB3fUNzJwgAGkQwePhnOxNYBGQwNHQAFXRVdlgRGHcgA===
Attribute's parameters need to be represented in metadata and can only take a very limited set of types.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. I did recall that it's possible to nest arrays in attribute declarations, but it looks like it's only possible for
object[]parameters:https://sharplab.io/#v2:D4AQTAjAsAUCDMACciCyBPAagQwDYEsATbAF3wHsA7AQRJICd8AjAVxIFNEAuRWh5tpwDesRGORIMOAsTJU+jVhwAUAB2z1sAWwDOickwBW7AMYkA2gF1EANzwt2OgJSIhiAL6xPMWOal4iUgpKZUp2AHd9I1MLazcwyINjMytXRAgPDydLWARkMDR0ABV0VXZYERhvIA===
I think that case would work fine with the logic as-is, but maybe a test is in order?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see this was brought up here as well: #91934 (comment)