Entrypoint detection stages #19093

TyOverby · 2017-04-28T19:58:38Z

No description provided.

TyOverby · 2017-05-02T18:12:43Z

Ready for initial review @dotnet/roslyn-compiler @VSadov

cston · 2017-05-02T18:59:42Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

+                var intOrVoidEntryPoints = ArrayBuilder<MethodSymbol>.GetInstance();
+                // Validity and diagnostics are also tracked because they must be conditionally handled 
+                // if there are not any "traditional" entrypoints found.
+                var taskEntryPoints = ArrayBuilder<(bool IsValid, MethodSymbol Candidate, DiagnosticBag SpecificDiagnostics)>.GetInstance();


intOrVoidEntryPoints and taskEntryPoints are not freed.

cston · 2017-05-02T19:01:46Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

                foreach (var candidate in entryPointCandidates)
                {
-                    if (!HasEntryPointSignature(candidate, warnings))
+                    var perCandidateBag = DiagnosticBag.GetInstance();


perCandidateBag is not freed. #Resolved

cston · 2017-05-02T20:07:08Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

+                    else
+                    {
+                        noMainFoundDiagnostics.Add(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, candidate.Locations.First(), candidate);
+                        noMainFoundDiagnostics.AddRange(perCandidateBag);


perCandidateBag is not freed, in if or else.

jaredpar · 2017-05-02T20:08:30Z

CC @dotnet/roslyn-compiler

Don't think the edit of an existing comment to add that alias produces new emails. At least I didn't see one.

cston · 2017-05-02T20:10:24Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

                    viableEntryPoints.Add(candidate);
                }

-                if ((object)mainType == null || viableEntryPoints.Count == 0)
+                if (viableEntryPoints.IsEmpty())


Does IsEmpty require an IEnumerable? If so, consider using .Count == 0 instead.

TyOverby · 2017-05-02T20:37:58Z

@cston: This PR implements a discussion that we had earlier about splitting the found entrypoints into different collections. Thanks for taking the time to review it!

cston · 2017-05-02T21:57:26Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

                    viableEntryPoints.Add(candidate);
                }

-                if ((object)mainType == null || viableEntryPoints.Count == 0)
+                if (viableEntryPoints.Count() == 0)


Count is a property. Is this binding to an IEnumerable extension method instead.

Oh yep, you're right.

cston · 2017-05-02T22:56:12Z

    internal bool ReturnsAwaitableToVoidOrInt(MethodSymbol method, DiagnosticBag diagnostics)

private?

Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs:1594 in ee1a204. [](commit_id = ee1a204, deletion_comment = False)

TyOverby · 2017-05-02T22:57:40Z

@dotnet-bot test ubuntu_16_debug_prtest please

TyOverby · 2017-05-02T22:59:19Z

@cston: I don't know what code review tool you are using, but I can't "reply" to your comment on internal bool ReturnsAwaitableToVoidOrInt. The reason that it is internal instead of private is that this method is also used by the emitter.

cston · 2017-05-02T23:07:11Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

+                    {
+                        noMainFoundDiagnostics.Add(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, candidate.Locations.First(), candidate);
+                        noMainFoundDiagnostics.AddRange(perCandidateBag);
+                        perCandidateBag.Free();
                    }


Perhaps check IsTaskLike first. That would simplify the IsCandidate check and perCandidateBag could be freed in one place rather than two.

if (IsTaskLike) { taskEntryPoints.Add(...); } else { if (IsCandidate) { intOrVoidEntryPoints.Add(candidate); } else { noMainFoundDiagnostics.Add(...); } perCandidatesBag.Free(); }

Looks good!

Done

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-02T23:18:39Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/CSharpResources.resx

@@ -5074,4 +5074,7 @@ To remove the warning, you can use /reference instead (set the Embed Interop Typ
  <data name="ERR_VoidInTuple" xml:space="preserve">
    <value>A tuple may not contain a value of type 'void'.</value>
  </data>
-</root>
+  <data name="ERR_NonTaskMainCantBeAsync" xml:space="preserve">
+    <value>Async Main methods must return Task or Task&lt;int&gt;</value>


Task<int> [](start = 50, length = 15)

Does it have to be Task<int> though? #Closed

Not technically, but I think this is fine for an error message.

I'd be willing to change it, but "Async Main methods must return either Task or Task whereby the return type of GetAwaiter().GetResult() is either void or int" seems a bit verbose for an error message.

I think we can simply say that int or void returning Main cannot be async. #Closed

+1 for "void returning Main cannot be async"

In reply to: 114608904 [](ancestors = 114608904)

Changed.

In reply to: 114619543 [](ancestors = 114619543,114608904)

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-02T23:27:08Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

        [Fact]
+        [CompilerTrait(CompilerFeature.AsyncMain)]


[CompilerTrait(CompilerFeature.AsyncMain)] [](start = 8, length = 42)

I think this can simply be applied to the test type instead. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-02T23:30:41Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Symbol/Symbols/Source/MethodTests.cs

-            var model = comp.GetSemanticModel(tree);
-            var token = tree.GetRoot().DescendantTokens().Where(t => t.Kind() == SyntaxKind.VoidKeyword).Skip(1).First();
-            var node = tree.GetRoot().FindNode(token.Span);
+            var node = tree.GetRoot().DescendantNodes().OfType<PredefinedTypeSyntax>().Where(n => n.Keyword.Kind() == SyntaxKind.VoidKeyword).ToList()[1];


ToList()[1] [](start = 142, length = 11)

Last(), or ElementAt(1)? #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-02T23:59:34Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

-                        warnings.Add(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, candidate.Locations.First(), candidate);
-                        continue;
+                        intOrVoidEntryPoints.Add(candidate);
+                        perCandidateBag.Free();


perCandidateBag.Free(); [](start = 24, length = 23)

Consider asserting that the bag is empty. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-03T00:04:47Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Errors/ErrorCode.cs

@@ -1479,5 +1479,6 @@ internal enum ErrorCode
        ERR_BadDynamicMethodArgDefaultLiteral = 9000,
        ERR_DefaultLiteralNotValid = 9001,
        WRN_DefaultInSwitch = 9002,
+        ERR_NonTaskMainCantBeAsync = 9003,


ERR_NonTaskMainCantBeAsync [](start = 8, length = 26)

Can we simply reuse ERR_MainCantBeAsync slot? #Closed

I wasn't sure about this. Are error numbers relevant to back-compat?

I'm reusing the old number, but with a new name and message.

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-03T00:05:16Z

It looks like this entry should be removed. #Closed

Refers to: src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/CSharpResources.resx:3599 in ee1a204. [](commit_id = ee1a204, deletion_comment = False)

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-03T00:09:58Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

+                            continue;
+                        }
+
+                        if (!IsValid)


if (!IsValid) [](start = 24, length = 13)

It feels like this if should be first in this loop (for consistency with int/void entry points). #Closed

Can these two if blocks be extracted to a helper method used in both the non-task-like and task-like candidates? (It would mean performing both checks for non-task-like candidates in the same loop, perhaps the first foreach, so the candidate is never added to intOrVoidEntryPoints.)

@AlekseyTs: Yep, that makes sense. Done.

@cston: Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I don't think that there would be much to gain from pulling this out into a local function and performing the check earlier would break the diagnostic guarantees

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-03T03:33:36Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Portable/Compilation/CSharpCompilation.cs

+                    // We can't add those Errors to the general diagnostics bag because it would break previously-working programs.
+                    // The fact that these warnings are not added when csc is invoked with /main is possibly a bug, and is tracked at
+                    // https://github.com/dotnet/roslyn/issues/18964
+                    diagnostics.AddRange(noMainFoundDiagnostics.AsEnumerable().Where(d => d.Severity == DiagnosticSeverity.Warning));


noMainFoundDiagnostics.AsEnumerable().Where(d => d.Severity == DiagnosticSeverity.Warning) [](start = 41, length = 90)

Linq is banned in compilers. Also, if the point of this code is to preserve old behavior, then we should probably be more precise and add only WRN_MainCantBeGeneric and WRN_InvalidMainSig warnings. #Closed

Linq is banned in compilers.

Fixed.

Also, if the point of this code is to preserve old behavior

Nah, the point is the emit errors where there were errors before, and emit warnings where there were warnings before. I don't care about emitting the same ones because it's possible to add more helpful diagnostics now.

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-03T03:56:20Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

-    }").WithArguments("async main", "7.1").WithLocation(6, 5)
-                );
+    }").WithArguments("async main", "7.1").WithLocation(6, 5),
+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.ERR_NoEntryPoint).WithLocation(1, 1));


Diagnostic(ErrorCode.ERR_NoEntryPoint).WithLocation(1, 1) [](start = 16, length = 57)

Please add corresponding message as a comment. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-04T22:44:18Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+        return 0.0f;
+    }
+}";
+            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.ReleaseExe, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7)).VerifyDiagnostics(


, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7) [](start = 101, length = 80)

If we don't expect the behavior to be version specific, we probably shouldn't use specific version for this test. Perhaps we should test it against default version and the latest version, latest will give us coverage for 7.1. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-04T22:44:45Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+        return 0.0f;
+    }
+}";
+            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.ReleaseExe.WithMainTypeName("A"), parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7)).VerifyDiagnostics();


, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7) [](start = 123, length = 80)

If we don't expect the behavior to be version specific, we probably shouldn't use specific version for this test. Perhaps we should test it against default version and the latest version, latest will give us coverage for 7.1. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-04T23:06:07Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+    }
+}";
+            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.ReleaseExe, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7_1)).VerifyDiagnostics(
+                // (6,23): warning CS0028: 'A.Main(string[])' has the wrong signature to be an entry point


// (6,23): warning CS0028: 'A.Main(string[])' has the wrong signature to be an entry point [](start = 16, length = 90)

Why don't we report the same error as in the previous test? #Closed

Discussed in person. Fixed.

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-04T23:25:30Z

Done with review pass. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-05T04:22:51Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_SameFullNameThisAggAgg, "Task<int>").WithArguments("", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<T>", "mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<TResult>"),
+                // (11,22): warning CS0028: 'Program.Main()' has the wrong signature to be an entry point
+                //     static Task<int> Main() {
+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, "Main").WithArguments("Program.Main()"));


Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, "Main").WithArguments("Program.Main()")); [](start = 16, length = 82)

It looks like we lost locations in the base-line again. Please restore and check other tests too. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-05T04:24:57Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

@@ -657,14 +746,14 @@ class A
 }";
            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.DebugExe, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7_1));
            compilation.VerifyDiagnostics(
-                // (6,22): error CS1983: The return type of an async method must be void, Task or Task<T>
+// (6,22): error CS1983: The return type of an async method must be void, Task or Task<T>
                //     async static int Main()


It looks like formatting is off. #Closed

Huh, fixed.

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-05T04:32:47Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+        return 1;
+    }
+}";
+            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.ReleaseExe, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7)).VerifyDiagnostics(


parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7) [](start = 103, length = 78)

Do you expect the behavior to change in the next version? #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-05T04:33:54Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+    }
+}";
+            var compilation = CreateCompilationWithMscorlib45(source, options: TestOptions.ReleaseExe, parseOptions: TestOptions.Regular.WithLanguageVersion(LanguageVersion.CSharp7_1)).VerifyDiagnostics(
+// (6,23): error CS4009: A void or int returning entry point cannot be async


It looks like formatting is off. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-05T04:40:13Z

Done with review pass. #Closed

TyOverby · 2017-05-08T16:08:49Z

@AlekseyTs Ping for another review

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-08T16:52:38Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

-                // (11,12): error CS1986: 'await' requires that the type Task<int> have a suitable GetAwaiter method
-                //     static Task<int> Main() {
-                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.ERR_BadAwaitArg, "Task<int>").WithArguments("System.Threading.Tasks.Task<int>").WithLocation(11, 12),
+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_SameFullNameThisAggAgg, "Task<int>").WithArguments("", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<T>", "mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<TResult>"),


Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_SameFullNameThisAggAgg, "Task").WithArguments("", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task", "mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task"), [](start = 16, length = 233)

It looks like we lost locations in the base-line again. Please restore and check other tests too. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-08T16:56:34Z

Done with review pass. #Closed

TyOverby · 2017-05-08T20:15:59Z

@AlekseyTs done

jaredpar · 2017-05-09T13:32:00Z

retest windows_debug_unit64_prtest please

TyOverby · 2017-05-09T16:42:08Z

ping @AlekseyTs

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-09T17:06:49Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Emit/CodeGen/CodeGenAsyncMainTests.cs

+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_SameFullNameThisAggAgg, "Task<int>").WithArguments("", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<T>", "mscorlib, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089", "System.Threading.Tasks.Task<TResult>"),
+                // (11,22): warning CS0028: 'Program.Main()' has the wrong signature to be an entry point
+                //     static Task<int> Main() {
+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, "Main").WithArguments("Program.Main()"));


Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_InvalidMainSig, "Main").WithArguments("Program.Main()")) [](start = 16, length = 81)

Location is not verified. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-09T17:13:10Z

src/Compilers/CSharp/Test/Semantic/Semantics/BindingAsyncTests.cs

@@ -3434,6 +3434,8 @@ class Test
                // (5,30): warning CS1998: This async method lacks 'await' operators and will run synchronously. Consider using the 'await' operator to await non-blocking API calls, or 'await Task.Run(...)' to do CPU-bound work on a background thread.
                //     async public static Task Main()
                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.WRN_AsyncLacksAwaits, "Main"),
+                // error CS5001: Program does not contain a static 'Main' method suitable for an entry point
+                Diagnostic(ErrorCode.ERR_NoEntryPoint),


Diagnostic(ErrorCode.ERR_NoEntryPoint), [](start = 16, length = 39)

Location is not verified. And above as well. #Closed

AlekseyTs · 2017-05-09T17:14:57Z

Done with review pass.

TyOverby · 2017-05-09T17:32:57Z

@AlekseyTs I temporarily made it so that missing WithLocation was a test failure, then I fixed all the failing tests. Assuming that my failure-inducing code was correct, I've cleaned up the remainder of the missing WithLocation errors.

AlekseyTs

LGTM

TyOverby added the PR For Personal Review Only The PR doesn’t require anyone other than the developer to review it. label Apr 28, 2017

dnfclas added the cla-already-signed label Apr 28, 2017

TyOverby force-pushed the async-main-stages branch from fc3946f to 42b3d19 Compare April 28, 2017 20:25

simplify partial method return type syntax finder tests

83c2f0d

TyOverby force-pushed the async-main-stages branch from d0473dc to 83c2f0d Compare May 2, 2017 18:10

TyOverby removed the PR For Personal Review Only The PR doesn’t require anyone other than the developer to review it. label May 2, 2017

cston reviewed May 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

TyOverby force-pushed the async-main-stages branch from af46feb to dad384c Compare May 2, 2017 20:26

cston reviewed May 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

Bug fixes and API use changes

ee1a204

TyOverby force-pushed the async-main-stages branch from dad384c to ee1a204 Compare May 2, 2017 22:37

cston reviewed May 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

AlekseyTs reviewed May 2, 2017

View reviewed changes

AlekseyTs reviewed May 3, 2017

View reviewed changes

AlekseyTs reviewed May 4, 2017

View reviewed changes

TyOverby added 2 commits May 4, 2017 16:56

rewrite error->warning code, add more cases to tests

56ad35b

change test language versions

ba23bae

TyOverby force-pushed the async-main-stages branch from 0b2b378 to ba23bae Compare May 5, 2017 00:23

AlekseyTs reviewed May 5, 2017

View reviewed changes

TyOverby added 2 commits May 5, 2017 07:57

Merge branch 'features/async-main' into async-main-stages

6ffa8ab

formatting on comments and adding WithLocation to tests

b5968a6

fix formatting for some tests

0f43ac2

AlekseyTs reviewed May 8, 2017

View reviewed changes

fix some formatting and added withlocation

4ac1006

AlekseyTs reviewed May 9, 2017

View reviewed changes

fix withlocation

f6a9818

AlekseyTs approved these changes May 9, 2017

View reviewed changes

TyOverby merged commit cc4ea46 into dotnet:features/async-main May 10, 2017

Entrypoint detection stages #19093

Entrypoint detection stages #19093

Conversation

TyOverby commented Apr 28, 2017

TyOverby commented May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

cston May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cston May 2, 2017 • edited by jaredpar Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cston May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jaredpar commented May 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TyOverby commented May 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cston commented May 2, 2017

TyOverby commented May 2, 2017

TyOverby commented May 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs commented May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs commented May 4, 2017 • edited Loading

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TyOverby commented May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

cston May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

cston May 2, 2017 •

edited by jaredpar

Loading

cston May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 2, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs commented May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 3, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 4, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs commented May 4, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs commented May 5, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs commented May 8, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 9, 2017 •

edited

Loading

AlekseyTs May 9, 2017 •

edited

Loading