Skip to content
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

ApiDiff: Allow deciding whether to include partial modifier in TypeDeclarationCSharpSyntaxRewriter output #45803

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 9, 2025

Conversation

carlossanlop
Copy link
Member

This PR is part of the work needed to create an ApiDiff tool that reuses some of the code from Microsoft.DotNet.GenAPI. The idea is to make the larger PR smaller and make it easier to review: #45389

This change adds a boolean parameter to the TypeDeclarationCSharpSyntaxRewriter to allow callers to decide whether to include the partial modifier in the output or not.

Copy link
Member

@ViktorHofer ViktorHofer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM aside from the unnecessary field in the TypeDeclarationCSharpSyntax... type.

@carlossanlop
Copy link
Member Author

/ba-g Build failure is unrelated: Unable to find directory for jdk 11.0.24; please make sure the tool is installed on this image. #45834

@carlossanlop carlossanlop enabled auto-merge (squash) January 9, 2025 17:38
@carlossanlop carlossanlop disabled auto-merge January 9, 2025 17:38
@carlossanlop carlossanlop removed the request for review from ericstj January 9, 2025 17:38
@carlossanlop carlossanlop removed the untriaged Request triage from a team member label Jan 9, 2025
@carlossanlop carlossanlop enabled auto-merge (squash) January 9, 2025 20:04
@carlossanlop carlossanlop merged commit ae86a4a into dotnet:main Jan 9, 2025
34 of 36 checks passed
@carlossanlop carlossanlop deleted the ApiDiffPart2 branch January 9, 2025 20:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants