Add support for Unbound Generic Types #158
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
This PR adds support for
.Events()
extension methods generation for types likeAvaloniaDictionary<TKey, TValue>
.What is the current behavior?
Currently, we generate code like
AvaloniaDictionary<global::TKey, global::TValue>
which apparently isn't a valid C# code, stumbled upon this when attempted to usePharmacist
in AvaloniaUI projects: https://github.com/reactiveui/Pharmacist/blob/main/src/Pharmacist.Tests/IntegrationTests/Approved/Avalonia.0.8.4.netstandard2.0.approved.txt#L284What is the new behavior?
Now, the behavior described above is fixed, at least for that
AvaloniaDictionary
type. Now we useAvaloniaDictionary<TKey, TValue>
as aprivate readonly
field, and pass the generic type parameters to the generatedRxAvaloniaDictionaryEvents<TKey, TValue>
class. Also, we pass the parameters to the generated.Events()
method, and now its signature looks like.Events<TKey, TValue>()
. Also, there was an issue with"Rx" + name + "Events"
classes that inherit from unbound generic types, and that should also be fixed now.What might this PR break?
Hopefully nothing. Let's wait for a report from the CI?