Add support for record classes#983
Closed
RexJaeschke wants to merge 10 commits intodotnet:draft-v9from
Closed
Conversation
BillWagner
force-pushed
the
Add-support-for-record-classes
branch
from
a5eeee1 to
15e988a
Compare
Member
|
Closed in preference of #1458 |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Notes:
A. I put the new subclause "With expression" prior to "Arithmetic operators", which once the V8 features "Indices and Ranges" and "Pattern matching" have been merged, should immediately follow "Range operator" and "Switch expression." Make sure these are all in the correct place. 12.4.2 Operator precedence and associativity will also need to be revised accordingly.
B. New subclause §rec-class-prtmem Printing members mentions a method
System.Runtime.CompilerServices.RuntimeHelpers.EnsureSufficientExecutionStack(). It's quite possible that this is an implementation-specific detail, in which case, we'll need to find words to make it abstract, and possibly update the Portability annex accordingly.