-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 88
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
Add support for static anonymous functions #988
Draft
RexJaeschke
wants to merge
4
commits into
dotnet:draft-v9
Choose a base branch
from
RexJaeschke:Add-support-for-static-anonymous-functions
base: draft-v9
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Draft
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
dd12cf2
Add support for static anonymous functions
RexJaeschke 4618ea5
Add support for static anonymous functions
RexJaeschke 7857046
Add support for static anonymous functions
RexJaeschke 98dfa67
Add support for static anonymous functions
RexJaeschke 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 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 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 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 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.
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.
Should
static
ensure that all delegate instances converted from the same anonymous function shall compare equal? (That would not require any caching of delegate instances.)I think
static
should not guarantee this equality. IIRC Roslyn generates an instance method even for a static anonymous function because it is more efficient for the calling convention. Then the delegate will refer to some instance, and will compare unequal if it refers to a different instance. Requiring such an implementation to ensure that the same instance is used every time might cost additional interlocked operations for thread safety.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.
Maybe a note about this in the specification of delegate equality would be useful though.