Repository navigation
[test-only-change] Record existing ref modifier parsing behavior - #84992
Merged
jjonescz merged 9 commits intoAug 21, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Capture current syntax and binding outcomes before ref modifier recovery changes so the follow-up diff shows only intentional behavior changes.
|
Azure Pipelines: Successfully started running 2 pipeline(s). There may be pipelines that require an authorized user to comment /azp run to run. |
Keep method ordering and split tests consistent with the follow-up so its diff focuses on changed parser and binding expectations.
Include the exact harness-generated diagnostic and source comments so every expected parser and binding error is reviewable in place.
Restore blank lines between adjacent test declarations for consistency with the surrounding test style.
Remove accidental blank-line runs and restore consistent separators and final newlines across the extracted tests.
Share each test source between syntax assertions and CreateCompilation so binding outcomes are visible and consistent with the other extracted tests.
Contributor
Author
|
@jjonescz this is ready for review. |
Keep the split ClosedModifier_03 cases on their original UsingNode binding-verification path.
jjonescz
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2026
jjonescz
enabled auto-merge (squash)
August 21, 2026 14:15
Validate the LSP sort prefix against the item's actual list position so unrelated completion additions do not break the obsolete-symbol test.
Include the independent order-agnostic completion assertion so the test-only PR can validate cleanly.
auto-merge was automatically disabled
August 21, 2026 16:00
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
CyrusNajmabadi
commented
Aug 21, 2026
| var resolvedItem = await testLspServer.ExecuteRequestAsync<LSP.CompletionItem, LSP.CompletionItem>(LSP.Methods.TextDocumentCompletionResolveName, actualItem, CancellationToken.None).ConfigureAwait(false); | ||
| Assert.Null(resolvedItem.LabelDetails); | ||
| Assert.Equal("0000", actualItem.SortText); | ||
| Assert.Equal(expectedSortText, resolvedItem.SortText); |
jjonescz
approved these changes
Aug 21, 2026
Contributor
Author
|
Thanks! |
This was referenced Aug 21, 2026
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.
Summary
partial ref structdoes not currently offer the modifier-order code fix.This is test-only and establishes the baseline for #84935, so that PR can show its behavior changes as expectation diffs rather than newly added tests.
Test plan
Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Syntax.UnitTests(net10.0): 10,649 passed, 25 skippedOrderModifiersCompilerErrorTests.PartialBeforeRefStruct(net10.0): passedMicrosoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow