Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 15, 2023. It is now read-only.

Fix for #365 #372

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 8, 2016
Merged

Conversation

SergeyTeplyakov
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ public TypeNode GetEnclosingTypeParameterByClosureTypeParameter(TypeNode closure
private readonly Cache<TypeNode> func2Type;

private readonly Dictionary<Local, MemberBinding> closureLocals = new Dictionary<Local, MemberBinding>();
private readonly Dictionary<MemberBinding, MemberBinding> closureMembers = new Dictionary<MemberBinding, MemberBinding>();
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removed this line.

@SergeyTeplyakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

Guys, will appreciate if you'll look at my changes.

@yaakov-h
Copy link
Contributor

yaakov-h commented Feb 7, 2016

I don't know the rewriter well but the changes seem to make sense.

Does this handle odd cases like Contract.Ensures(Contract.ForAll(_collection, o => o != null)) or Contract.Ensures(Contract.ForAll(Contract.Result<IEnumerable<int>>(), o => o > _someVar))?

@hubuk
Copy link
Contributor

hubuk commented Feb 7, 2016

Looks fine.

@SergeyTeplyakov
Copy link
Contributor Author

@yaakov-h Yep, this should be covered as well. I think I even saw such kind of test cases when I worked on this (because once I've broke some of them).

SergeyTeplyakov added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2016
@SergeyTeplyakov SergeyTeplyakov merged commit e0a9c32 into microsoft:master Feb 8, 2016
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants