You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 30, 2023. It is now read-only.
We currently provide an autofix that will add the generic delegate type to the Setup<T> call,
but it would be even better if the generic argument wasn't even needed. This could be achieved
by just generating additional overloads of Setup via extension methods.
Since overload resolution is performed on parameter types (and not return value type type), there
may be chances of conflicts in generated code. Maybe in those cases the type of the delegate is
just required to disambiguate?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We currently provide an autofix that will add the generic delegate type to the
Setup<T>
call,but it would be even better if the generic argument wasn't even needed. This could be achieved
by just generating additional overloads of
Setup
via extension methods.Since overload resolution is performed on parameter types (and not return value type type), there
may be chances of conflicts in generated code. Maybe in those cases the type of the delegate is
just required to disambiguate?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: