-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.1k
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
Async main codegen #18472
Async main codegen #18472
Changes from 10 commits
e27fb34
b4cee90
61e4705
39a8600
0cb90e3
4af405a
5a3fbcf
b16987f
8f0e223
ed6271d
578e811
92d3bfc
af675d3
1f71b66
671c53b
e99bf98
1114921
21a892c
c692009
9144795
cd2488e
d0675b1
04b5380
112f4fe
f532f23
617c791
5f177ba
d1e3e72
39cf05d
41cddf9
90edc8f
0407c20
8acedcc
9cbf02c
fe158be
89a15d8
1465d2c
2fc8c62
7d01d2e
e9e2875
81b01e2
4cd16ea
8a8afe2
1c2c643
c8b7b07
d975ba2
bad2923
85de26c
f121bb4
0a84b1d
e4e355e
b290268
eb68cea
247e05d
8e60326
881dea0
1d2b4db
3e8237a
2047833
7187917
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@ | |
using Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Diagnostics; | ||
using Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Emit; | ||
using Roslyn.Utilities; | ||
using static Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp.Symbols.SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol; | ||
|
||
namespace Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.CSharp | ||
{ | ||
|
@@ -184,6 +185,8 @@ public static void CompileMethodBodies( | |
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Returns the MethodSymbol for the assembly entrypoint. If the user has a Task returning main, | ||
// this function returns the synthesized Main MethodSymbol. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we need to specify the "MoveNext" as an entry point for debug purposes? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. If we have to specify two entry points - actual and for debugging purposes, it would be a different change, I guess. In reply to: 111274974 [](ancestors = 111274974) There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'll manually test this and see if I run into anything. |
||
private static MethodSymbol GetEntryPoint(CSharpCompilation compilation, PEModuleBuilder moduleBeingBuilt, bool hasDeclarationErrors, DiagnosticBag diagnostics, CancellationToken cancellationToken) | ||
{ | ||
var entryPointAndDiagnostics = compilation.GetEntryPointAndDiagnostics(cancellationToken); | ||
|
@@ -196,7 +199,23 @@ private static MethodSymbol GetEntryPoint(CSharpCompilation compilation, PEModul | |
diagnostics.AddRange(entryPointAndDiagnostics.Diagnostics); | ||
|
||
var entryPoint = entryPointAndDiagnostics.MethodSymbol; | ||
var synthesizedEntryPoint = entryPoint as SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol; | ||
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We should add a comment to the top of the function noting that this returns the real entry point vs. the user defined one. The name of the function is ambiguous with this feature now. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
if (entryPoint == null) | ||
{ | ||
Debug.Assert(entryPointAndDiagnostics.Diagnostics.HasAnyErrors() || !compilation.Options.Errors.IsDefaultOrEmpty); | ||
return null; | ||
} | ||
|
||
bool addedDefinition = false; | ||
SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol synthesizedEntryPoint = entryPoint as SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol; | ||
|
||
if ((object)synthesizedEntryPoint == null && entryPoint.HasAsyncMainReturnType(compilation) && compilation.LanguageVersion >= LanguageVersion.CSharp7_1) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Are we reporting an error for There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yes, but only if there are no non-async mains available. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Do we really need to check There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yep, good point. Done. |
||
{ | ||
synthesizedEntryPoint = new AsyncForwardEntryPoint(compilation, diagnostics, entryPoint.ContainingType, entryPoint); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It seems odd that we are attaching the In the case the There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Right now the only place that the diagnosticsBag is used is during the |
||
entryPoint = synthesizedEntryPoint; | ||
addedDefinition = true; | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (((object)synthesizedEntryPoint != null) && | ||
(moduleBeingBuilt != null) && | ||
!hasDeclarationErrors && | ||
|
@@ -221,7 +240,11 @@ private static MethodSymbol GetEntryPoint(CSharpCompilation compilation, PEModul | |
moduleBeingBuilt.SetMethodBody(synthesizedEntryPoint, emittedBody); | ||
} | ||
|
||
Debug.Assert((object)entryPoint != null || entryPointAndDiagnostics.Diagnostics.HasAnyErrors() || !compilation.Options.Errors.IsDefaultOrEmpty); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is not clear why this assert is removed.#Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The assert wasn't deleted, it was moved upwards in the file to line 203 |
||
if (addedDefinition && moduleBeingBuilt != null) | ||
{ | ||
moduleBeingBuilt.AddSynthesizedDefinition(entryPoint.ContainingType, synthesizedEntryPoint); | ||
} | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Could There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. For some reason I pulled this out specifically, but that might have been because I was fixing other bugs in the implementation and wanted to isolate this. Changing it back to what you recommend does work. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
|
||
return entryPoint; | ||
} | ||
|
||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -595,6 +595,29 @@ internal bool IsEntryPointCandidate | |
get { return IsStatic && Name == WellKnownMemberNames.EntryPointMethodName; } | ||
} | ||
|
||
internal bool HasAsyncMainReturnType(CSharpCompilation compilation) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks like a very specialized helper, I wouldn't put it into MethodSymbol. Consider putting it next to the consumer and making it private. Also, the name is somewhat confusing because the method doesn't care whether the method is async or not. It only checks the return type for Task. Consider renaming the method to reflect that. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I see that the method is used in more than one place, it is fine to keep it here, I guess.#Closed #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'll move it, but I think the name is fine as-is. "HasAsyncMainReturnType" tells me that the return type needs to be There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Then the name should covey just that, for example ReturnsTaskOrTaskOfInt, describes exactly what to expect from the function. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Changed name. I left it in MethodSymbol because MethodSymbol also has |
||
{ | ||
var namedType = ReturnType as NamedTypeSymbol; | ||
if (namedType == null) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
else if (namedType.ConstructedFrom == compilation.GetWellKnownType(WellKnownType.System_Threading_Tasks_Task)) | ||
{ | ||
// Change this to `namedType.IsNonGenericTaskType` if you want to support "task-like" objects. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be a PROTOTYPE comment?#Closed #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Right now we are making a conscious decision to ban task-likes. I left the comment in case we wanted to loosen the rules later on. |
||
return true; | ||
} | ||
else if (namedType.ConstructedFrom == compilation.GetWellKnownType(WellKnownType.System_Threading_Tasks_Task_T)) | ||
{ | ||
// Change this to `namedType.IsGenericTaskType` if you want to support "task-like" objects. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should this be a PROTOTYPE comment?#Closed #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Right now we are making a conscious decision to ban task-likes. I left the comment in case we wanted to loosen the rules later on. |
||
return namedType.TypeArguments[0].SpecialType == SpecialType.System_Int32; | ||
} | ||
else | ||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
/// <summary> | ||
/// Checks if the method has an entry point compatible signature, i.e. | ||
/// - the return type is either void, int, <see cref="System.Threading.Tasks.Task" />, | ||
|
@@ -604,36 +627,14 @@ internal bool IsEntryPointCandidate | |
internal bool HasEntryPointSignature(CSharpCompilation compilation) | ||
{ | ||
|
||
bool IsAsyncMainReturnType(TypeSymbol type) | ||
{ | ||
var namedType = type as NamedTypeSymbol; | ||
if (namedType == null) | ||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
else if (namedType.ConstructedFrom == compilation.GetWellKnownType(WellKnownType.System_Threading_Tasks_Task)) | ||
{ | ||
// Change this to `namedType.IsNonGenericTaskType` if you want to support "task-like" objects. | ||
return true; | ||
} | ||
else if (namedType.ConstructedFrom == compilation.GetWellKnownType(WellKnownType.System_Threading_Tasks_Task_T)) | ||
{ | ||
// Change this to `namedType.IsGenericTaskType` if you want to support "task-like" objects. | ||
return namedType.TypeArguments[0].SpecialType == SpecialType.System_Int32; | ||
} | ||
else | ||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (IsVararg) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Empty lines above. |
||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
} | ||
|
||
TypeSymbol returnType = ReturnType; | ||
bool isAsyncMainReturnType = IsAsyncMainReturnType(returnType); | ||
bool isAsyncMainReturnType = HasAsyncMainReturnType(compilation); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The name of the local is confusing, it implies that the method is async, yet it may disagree with There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
if (returnType.SpecialType != SpecialType.System_Int32 && returnType.SpecialType != SpecialType.System_Void && !isAsyncMainReturnType) | ||
{ | ||
return false; | ||
|
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@ | ||
// Copyright (c) Microsoft. All Rights Reserved. Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0. See License.txt in the project root for license information. | ||
|
||
using System; | ||
using System.Collections.Generic; | ||
using System.Collections.Immutable; | ||
using System.Diagnostics; | ||
|
@@ -329,6 +330,157 @@ private static BoundCall CreateParameterlessCall(CSharpSyntaxNode syntax, BoundE | |
{ WasCompilerGenerated = true }; | ||
} | ||
|
||
// A synthesized entrypoint that forwards all calls to an async Main Method | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please use standard doc comments.#Closed #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
internal sealed class AsyncForwardEntryPoint : SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol | ||
{ | ||
// The user-defined asyncrhonous main method. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Typo: There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Thanks! |
||
private readonly MethodSymbol _userMain; | ||
private DiagnosticBag _diagnosticBag; | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This can be readonly as well. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Have we figured out my earlier questionts about this bag in general? It seems like it's opening the door for duplicate / unnecessary errors here. Feel like they should be resolved at the point of creating this symbol, not later. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I've moved this bag to the constructor and provide the userMain location as the location for the diagnostic to go. |
||
|
||
private readonly ReturnKind _returnKind; | ||
private readonly ParamKind _paramKind; | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Can be a local or removed if |
||
|
||
private readonly ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol> _parameters; | ||
|
||
// Which "kind" of Main is this: `void Main` or `int Main`? | ||
// This is determined by looking at the return type of the user-provided Main | ||
private enum ReturnKind | ||
{ | ||
VoidReturning, | ||
IntReturning, | ||
} | ||
// Does this main method need to forward arguments to the user-provided Main? | ||
private enum ParamKind | ||
{ | ||
NoArgs, | ||
StringArrayArgs, | ||
} | ||
|
||
// Task -> Void | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please use standard doc comments.#Closed #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
// Task<_> -> Int32 | ||
private static TypeSymbol TranslateReturnType(CSharpCompilation compilation, TypeSymbol returnType) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
According to the C# language specification type of the task's result is determined based on the return type of the GetResult method, rather than based on the shape of the task type itself. Implementation of this function doesn't follow this. #Closed |
||
{ | ||
return returnType.IsGenericTaskType(compilation) | ||
? compilation.GetSpecialType(SpecialType.System_Int32) | ||
: compilation.GetSpecialType(SpecialType.System_Void); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is it possible for There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. We should be protected at this point, as this code is only executed if an async-main entrypoint was found, which can't happen if GetSpecialType is broken. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It feels like this can fail without producing any errors, we should be using a helper from the Binder instead that makes sure the right diagnostics is reported. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Please add tests for cases when int or void are missing (two separate cases). #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I believe that this code can't fail due to the checks in IsEntryPointSignature. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see nothing in There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. |
||
} | ||
|
||
// Task -> ReturnKind.VoidReturning | ||
// Task<_> -> ReturnKind.IntReturning | ||
private static ReturnKind GetReturnKind(CSharpCompilation compilation, TypeSymbol returnType) | ||
{ | ||
return returnType.IsGenericTaskType(compilation) ? ReturnKind.IntReturning : ReturnKind.VoidReturning; | ||
} | ||
|
||
internal AsyncForwardEntryPoint(CSharpCompilation compilation, DiagnosticBag diagnosticBag, NamedTypeSymbol containingType, MethodSymbol userMain) : | ||
base(containingType, TranslateReturnType(compilation, userMain.ReturnType)) | ||
{ | ||
// There should be no way for a userMain to be passed in unless it already passed the | ||
// parameter checks for determining entrypoint validity. | ||
Debug.Assert(userMain.ParameterCount == 0 || userMain.ParameterCount == 1); | ||
|
||
_userMain = userMain; | ||
_diagnosticBag = diagnosticBag; | ||
_paramKind = userMain.ParameterCount == 0 ? ParamKind.NoArgs : ParamKind.StringArrayArgs; | ||
_returnKind = GetReturnKind(compilation, userMain.ReturnType); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Consider moving There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. GetReturnKind requires a Compilation object, so I'd rather keep it here. |
||
|
||
switch (_paramKind) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Perhaps There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
{ | ||
case ParamKind.StringArrayArgs: | ||
var stringType = compilation.GetSpecialType(SpecialType.System_String); | ||
var stringArrayType = ArrayTypeSymbol.CreateCSharpArray(compilation.Assembly, stringType); | ||
_parameters = ImmutableArray.Create( | ||
SynthesizedParameterSymbol.Create(this, stringArrayType, 0, RefKind.None, userMain.Parameters[0].Name)); | ||
break; | ||
default: | ||
_parameters = ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol>.Empty; | ||
break; | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Consider separate cases for |
||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
public override string Name => MainName; | ||
|
||
public override ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol> Parameters => _parameters; | ||
|
||
internal override BoundBlock CreateBody() | ||
{ | ||
var syntax = this.GetSyntax(); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this return the root of CSharpSyntaxTree.Dummy? It feels like we might want to use more specific node. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It does. Just like the rest of the synthesized entry points. What other tree would we use? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should use syntax corresponding to the method we are wrapping. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There's no equivalent syntax from what we've made to what we're producing. How would red squiggles all over their async main that don't correspond to the actual error be helpful? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually there is - it is the declaration of the user's Main that we are wrapping. Pretty much every time we synthesize code, there is a user syntax that is related to that and we are using that syntax rather than providing no location at all. You are using bad code as a template, given the amount of issues with it, it is a prototype quality code at best - some experiments around scripting.
First of all they won't be "all over their async main", I would expect as to squiggle just its name, this what we usually do when we report errors for a declaration. And this will be helpful as it would point the declaration that triggered the errors, i.e. the source of the problem. #Closed There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Which specific node? What is the point of having a specific "dummy" node? In reply to: 111511103 [](ancestors = 111511103) |
||
|
||
var arguments = Parameters.SelectAsArray(p => new BoundParameter(syntax, p, p.Type) as BoundExpression); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Use There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done |
||
|
||
// Main(args) or Main() | ||
BoundCall userMainInvocation = new BoundCall( | ||
syntax: this.GetSyntax(), | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
receiverOpt: null, | ||
method: _userMain, | ||
arguments: arguments, | ||
argumentNamesOpt: default(ImmutableArray<string>), | ||
argumentRefKindsOpt: default(ImmutableArray<RefKind>), | ||
isDelegateCall: false, | ||
expanded: false, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Consider testing synthesized call to There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Could you expand on what you mean by this? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I've added a test for params |
||
invokedAsExtensionMethod: false, | ||
argsToParamsOpt: default(ImmutableArray<int>), | ||
resultKind: LookupResultKind.Viable, | ||
type: _userMain.ReturnType) | ||
{ WasCompilerGenerated = true }; | ||
|
||
// PROTOTYPE(async-main): Errors should likely be reported here instead of bailing. | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Agree. Likely we can just move this up into the creation of the type. This would also avoid the need to store the bag on the type. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
var getAwaiterMethod = GetRequiredMethod(_userMain.ReturnType, WellKnownMemberNames.GetAwaiter, _diagnosticBag); | ||
Debug.Assert(getAwaiterMethod != null); | ||
|
||
var getResultMethod = GetRequiredMethod(getAwaiterMethod.ReturnType, WellKnownMemberNames.GetResult, _diagnosticBag); | ||
Debug.Assert(getResultMethod != null); | ||
|
||
// GetAwaiter().GetResult() | ||
BoundCall getAwaiterGetResult = | ||
CreateParameterlessCall( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
method: getResultMethod, | ||
receiver: CreateParameterlessCall( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
method: getAwaiterMethod, | ||
receiver: userMainInvocation | ||
) | ||
); | ||
|
||
BoundStatement statement = null; | ||
switch (_returnKind) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Yeah, that's clean enough I guess. |
||
{ | ||
case ReturnKind.IntReturning: | ||
// return (GetAwaiter().GetResult()) | ||
statement = new BoundReturnStatement( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
refKind: RefKind.None, | ||
expressionOpt: getAwaiterGetResult | ||
); | ||
break; | ||
case ReturnKind.VoidReturning: | ||
// { GetAwaiter().GetResult(); return; } | ||
statement = new BoundBlock( | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Can we just return this There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Done. |
||
syntax: syntax, | ||
locals: ImmutableArray<LocalSymbol>.Empty, | ||
statements: ImmutableArray.Create<BoundStatement>( | ||
new BoundExpressionStatement( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
expression: getAwaiterGetResult | ||
), | ||
new BoundReturnStatement( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
refKind: RefKind.None, | ||
expressionOpt: null | ||
) | ||
) | ||
); | ||
break; | ||
}; | ||
|
||
return new BoundBlock( | ||
syntax: syntax, | ||
locals: ImmutableArray<LocalSymbol>.Empty, | ||
statements: ImmutableArray.Create<BoundStatement>(statement)); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
private sealed class ScriptEntryPoint : SynthesizedEntryPointSymbol | ||
{ | ||
private readonly MethodSymbol _getAwaiterMethod; | ||
|
@@ -344,15 +496,9 @@ internal ScriptEntryPoint(NamedTypeSymbol containingType, TypeSymbol returnType, | |
_getResultMethod = getResultMethod; | ||
} | ||
|
||
public override string Name | ||
{ | ||
get { return MainName; } | ||
} | ||
public override string Name => MainName; | ||
|
||
public override ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol> Parameters | ||
{ | ||
get { return ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol>.Empty; } | ||
} | ||
public override ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol> Parameters => ImmutableArray<ParameterSymbol>.Empty; | ||
|
||
// private static void <Main>() | ||
// { | ||
|
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.
Is this
using static
needed?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 mean, yeah, it does a member that is being used statically. However, I could just fully-qualify that use.