Add some polyfill to simplify code across compilations #3974
Conversation
| /// <summary> | ||
| /// A polyfill helper for Guid. | ||
| /// </summary> | ||
| internal static class GuidPolyfill |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@MarcoRossignoli Was suggesting to have only one class called Polyfill that would host all polyfills as sub-classes (e.g. Polyfill.Guid.Parse. It looks like a good idea but doesn't allow for extension methods (need to be defined at top class-level).
We can:
- Keep solution implemented in this PR
- Go with @MarcoRossignoli's suggestion for non-extension methods (not ideal as it would force us to have 2 ways)
- Same as 2. but we do that also for extension methods (will no longer be extension methods).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see theoretical way around it but it requires three classes and instances. Seems like PolyfillGuid or GuidPolyfill in separate class is much easier way to go.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's ok as-is to me.
| #else | ||
| Id = Guid.Parse(guidString); | ||
| #endif | ||
| Id = GuidPolyfill.Parse(guidString, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should the used signature be the "older" one, I mean from user perspective looks like the culture is important...but it's important only for one version...so I wonder if we should have the one without culture and setup the correct default for the newer one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That's a good suggestion. I don't see us using anything else than InvariantCulture so it would simplify calls. My idea here is to match newest API so that code looks like what you would expect if using recent .NET.
Maybe I will keep it as-is.
Description
Add some polyfill to simplify code across compilations. This way we can use only one API but correctly target the recommended way for newer .NET.