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

[Nullable Reference Types] Specify behavior for nullable analysis attributes #1092

Open
Tracked by #1085
BillWagner opened this issue Apr 26, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #1191
Open
Tracked by #1085

[Nullable Reference Types] Specify behavior for nullable analysis attributes #1092

BillWagner opened this issue Apr 26, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #1191
Assignees
Labels
meeting: discuss This issue should be discussed at the next TC49-TG2 meeting

Comments

@BillWagner
Copy link
Member

There are a number of attributes read by the compiler that support nullable flow analysis, and provide some additional syntactic rules where those attributes are applied.

The list of attributes, and how that affects the syntax where applied should be normative. How those attributes affect flow analysis may include both normative and informative text.

@BillWagner
Copy link
Member Author

Adding the meeting discuss label based on discussion in our September meeting.

Do any of these attributes need to be added to the standard?

They are used only to inform the static null state analysis for the compiler.

@jskeet
Copy link
Contributor

jskeet commented Oct 2, 2024

Decision on 2024-10-02:

  • we'll list the attributes normatively, saying they are reserved for nullable analysis
  • as per other decisions, we will not go into detail and require specific nullable analysis
  • we will provide one or two informative examples in detail about what "a compiler" could do

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
meeting: discuss This issue should be discussed at the next TC49-TG2 meeting
Projects
No open projects
Status: 👀 In review
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants