-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.4k
Fix config source gen binding with SslClientAuthenticationOptions #107579
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
Merged
tarekgh
merged 2 commits into
dotnet:main
from
tarekgh:FixConfigSourceGenWithBindingWithSslClientAuthenticationOptions
Sep 11, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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 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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Can you explain all these conditions? I only understand the first, why the others?
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.
complexType is not CollectionSpecwe have special handling to the collections so we should not change how we do it especially it should work in most cases. look atruntime/src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder/gen/Emitter/CoreBindingHelpers.cs
Line 1146 in e4f93db
((ObjectSpec)complexType).InstantiationStrategy == ObjectInstantiationStrategy.ParameterizedConstructor)is needed because if it is different ObjectInstantiationStrategy value means we can still create and handle the object. look atruntime/src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder/gen/Emitter/CoreBindingHelpers.cs
Line 1170 in e4f93db
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.
_typeIndex.GetEffectiveTypeSpec(complexType).IsValueTypecan be handled too,runtime/src/libraries/Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration.Binder/gen/Emitter/CoreBindingHelpers.cs
Line 933 in e4f93db
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.
I was trying to scope the change to exact failure cases to reduce any risk of breaking anything.
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.
I see - I was surprised we'd even get this far with a type that has no bindable members and we're trying to construct with a parameterized constructor. I would have expected us to discover that in parsing and use a different spec type (not supported or something) - why do we miss this in parsing?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
That is because we want use
_typeIndexwhich is created and filled in the emitter. If we want to do the detection earlier, we'll need to do more involving refactoring which will make the change risky for 9.0. Note, the parser fills some data structures which expect to see the type specs supported by_typeIndexlater during the emission. so refactoring will not be simple IMO.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.
I see - given that it seems like the parser isn't even capable of completely deciding which types will be handled. It can only decide which may be handled and we filter further during emit. That feels like something we'd need to fix to address other issues.