Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixes to the covariant returns support #37265

Closed
2 of 3 tasks
janvorli opened this issue Jun 1, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #56496
Closed
2 of 3 tasks

Fixes to the covariant returns support #37265

janvorli opened this issue Jun 1, 2020 · 4 comments · Fixed by #56496
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@janvorli
Copy link
Member

janvorli commented Jun 1, 2020

This issue tracks changes we will likely want to make to the covariant returns support after the #35308 merge.

  • Visit the pointers, byrefs, function pointer returns scenarios and determine if they should be supported, and add test coverage.
  • Add a chapter on the covariant returns to https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/master/docs/design/specs/Ecma-335-Augments.md ? Try to match the style and language used by ECMA-335 (e.g. in the ideal case - we would just copy&paste it over once we figure out how to make edits to ECMA-335).
  • Crossgen2 - for performance reasons, we will likely need to burn a MethodFlags bit for RequiresSlotUnification (in the AttributeMetadataCache category) and make this a proper member on MethodDesc.
@janvorli janvorli added this to the 5.0 milestone Jun 1, 2020
@janvorli janvorli self-assigned this Jun 1, 2020
@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot Dotnet-GitSync-Bot added the untriaged New issue has not been triaged by the area owner label Jun 1, 2020
@mangod9 mangod9 removed the untriaged New issue has not been triaged by the area owner label Jun 1, 2020
@mangod9
Copy link
Member

mangod9 commented Aug 24, 2020

I believe this work is actually complete. Will wait for @janvorli to confirm though.

@janvorli
Copy link
Member Author

@mangod9 the first bullet is completed (I've just marked it as such), but the second and third are not.

@mangod9 mangod9 modified the milestones: 5.0.0, 6.0.0 Aug 28, 2020
@mangod9
Copy link
Member

mangod9 commented Aug 28, 2020

ok, moved to 6.0. Guess we can do the documentation update as part of quality week?

@janvorli
Copy link
Member Author

It sounds reasonable, thanks!

@ghost ghost added the in-pr There is an active PR which will close this issue when it is merged label Jul 28, 2021
@ghost ghost removed the in-pr There is an active PR which will close this issue when it is merged label Jul 29, 2021
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 28, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants