Exception on MakeGenericMethod called on a static interface method from GetInterfaceMap's TargetMethods #90351
Description
Description
This issue is for adding the tests, see Other information
When you use MakeGenericMethod on a static generic method, which comes from GetInterfaceMap's TargetMethods, it throws an InvalidOperationException. It doesn't throw when you get the method directly from the type.
Gotta love static interface methods :)
Originally found by @Joe4evr on the C# discord, just thought I'd report it so it doesn't get lost.
Reproduction Steps
using System;
using System.Linq;
using System.Reflection;
public class C
{
public static void Main()
{
var x1 = typeof(C1).GetMethod("I1.A", (BindingFlags)(-1));
var x2 = typeof(C1).GetInterfaceMap(typeof(I1)).TargetMethods.Single((x) => x.Name == "I1.A"); //doesn't occur on InterfaceMethods
Console.WriteLine(x1.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)).ContainsGenericParameters);
Console.WriteLine(x2.MakeGenericMethod(typeof(int)).ContainsGenericParameters); //exception is here (on call to MakeGenericMethod)
}
}
public interface I1
{
static abstract void A<T>();
}
public class C1 : I1
{
static void I1.A<T>() { } //doesn't need to be an explicit implementation
}Expected behavior
Prints:
False
False
Actual behavior
Prints:
False
Exception
System.InvalidOperationException: Void I1.A[T]() is not a GenericMethodDefinition. MakeGenericMethod may only be called on a method for which MethodBase.IsGenericMethodDefinition is true.
at System.Reflection.RuntimeMethodInfo.MakeGenericMethod(Type[] methodInstantiation)
at C.Main()
at System.RuntimeMethodHandle.InvokeMethod(Object target, Void** arguments, Signature sig, Boolean isConstructor)
at System.Reflection.MethodInvoker.Invoke(Object obj, IntPtr* args, BindingFlags invokeAttr)
Regression?
No response
Known Workarounds
No response
Configuration
I tested this in sharplab.io
I have also reproduced locally on macOS 13.4.1 x64 with .NET 7.0.10
Other information
The above described issue was fixed with other changes. This issue is now for adding tests to ensure we do not regress.
I also found another instance of the original issue: #90351 (comment).