Cleanup of lightup layer after MS.CA upgrade #6762
Conversation
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\ITypeSymbolExtensions.cs" /> | ||
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\IFunctionPointerInvocationOperationWrapper.cs" /> | ||
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\LightupHelpers.cs" /> | ||
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\NullableAnnotation.cs" /> | ||
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\NullableContext.cs" /> | ||
| <Compile Include="$(MSBuildThisFileDirectory)Lightup\NullableContextExtensions.cs" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Removed files moved to PublicApiAnalyzers project, which is still on MS.CA 1.2.1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
1.2.1? That is Visual Studio 2015? Do we still care about such an old version?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There isn't any motivating need to update. It works fine and there is no indication that will change.
| break; | ||
| } | ||
| case OperationKind.BinaryPattern: | ||
| // These high level patterns should not be present in the lowered CFG: https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/47068 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the root cause for #6755. We will need to figure out performing flow analysis in presence of binary pattern operations. I am working on a separate PR for it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It could be for a bunch of CA1508 too. I'd love to see the correct handling of this will be!
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #6762 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.33% 96.33%
=======================================
Files 1389 1388 -1
Lines 325745 325717 -28
Branches 10739 10734 -5
=======================================
- Hits 313809 313792 -17
+ Misses 9224 9215 -9
+ Partials 2712 2710 -2 |
| // TODO: Remove the below string based checks when we move to Microsoft.CodeAnalysis 3.7 or later. | ||
| // TODO: File a tracking bug. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ouch, this would have worked totally fine with lightup.
Follow-up to #6726