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

FunctionAnnotationAction: improvements for top-level tuple patterns #759

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Dec 3, 2024

Conversation

DedSec256
Copy link
Contributor

@DedSec256 DedSec256 commented Nov 12, 2024

Fix for RIDER-119806

It is also consistent with parameter info (and xml docs) now

image
image

@auduchinok
Copy link
Member

@DedSec256 Could you also check if active patterns work good in this action?

Consider this case with f : string -> unit and (|TryParseBool|_|) : string -> bool option:

let f (TryParseBool enabled) = ()

What would get annotated? I'd probably expect it to annotate the outer string pattern.

@DedSec256
Copy link
Contributor Author

@auduchinok, it works as expected. I will add a test.

@DedSec256 DedSec256 force-pushed the ber.a/annotateTuples branch from 95fd409 to 5394280 Compare December 3, 2024 16:49
@DedSec256 DedSec256 merged commit 642cec8 into main Dec 3, 2024
1 check passed
@DedSec256 DedSec256 deleted the ber.a/annotateTuples branch December 3, 2024 17:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants