Fix DeclaringCompilation for source methods #59278
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
jcouv
force-pushed
the
declaring-compilation
branch
from
cd2a80b to
46b203e
Compare
|
@AlekseyTs Chuck mentioned that you discussed a similar issue last week. Let me know what you think. |
Let's discuss offline next week. |
|
Closing in favor of a more systematic EE-side solution (avoiding source symbols being parented to PE symbols). Tracked by #59093 (comment) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #58198
The problem:
Symbol.DeclaringCompilationrelies onContainingModule/ContainingSymbolto get the declaring compilation. But for lambdas in an EE scenario the containing symbol may be from PE. So in such scenarios, we'd get a null declaring compilation.This breaks
SourceMethodSymbolWithAttributeswhich uses several calls toDeclaringCompilation.GetWellKnownType(...).Relates to #59069 (recent related fix) and #59111 (follow-up issue about definite assignment)