UriBuilder does not update the port number when scheme changes in Powershell 7

[heikkiri]

Description

In PS7 - the URI port does not reset the port to reflect change to scheme change.

Repro steps
$builder = New-Object UriBuilder
$builder.GetType().Assembly.FullName
System.Private.Uri, Version=4.0.6.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a
$builder.Host = "me.com"
$builder

Fragment :
Host : me.com
Password :
Path : /
Port : -1
Query :
Scheme : http
Uri : http://me.com/
UserName :

$builder.Scheme = [Uri]::UriSchemeHttps
$builder

Fragment :
Host : me.com
Password :
Path : /
Port : 80
Query :
Scheme : https
Uri : https://me.com:80/
UserName :

Expected behavior: The port should be 443 when scheme is assigned HTTPS
Actual Behavior: The port for HTTPS is reported as 80, and not 443.

Configuration

$PSVersionTable

Name Value

---

PSVersion 7.0.3
PSEdition Core
GitCommitId 7.0.3
OS Microsoft Windows 10.0.19041
Platform Win32NT
PSCompatibleVersions {1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0…}
PSRemotingProtocolVersion 2.3
SerializationVersion 1.1.0.1
WSManStackVersion 3.0

Regression?

Other information

Does not repro in PS5.1

[Dotnet-GitSync-Bot]

I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this issue. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label.

[ghost]

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/ncl
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

[MihaZupan]

Does not repro in PS5.1

Are you sure? This behavior is the same going back to Framework 2.0 (maybe even earlier).

[svick]

@MihaZupan

Even so, I do think the behavior is very confusing, because it depends on the order in which you access properties.

For example, consider the following code:

var builder = new UriBuilder { Host = "me.com" };
Console.WriteLine(builder.Port);
Console.WriteLine(builder.Uri);
Console.WriteLine(builder.Port);

Its output is:

-1
http://me.com/
80

I definitely wouldn't expect that accessing the Uri property would change the value of Port.

Does the current behavior have to be kept for backwards compatibility? If not, I think it should be changed. If it does have to be kept, I think it should at least be clearly documented (the current documentation is fairly sparse).