-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6k
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
Update analyzer tutorial #23066
Update analyzer tutorial #23066
Conversation
The current tests use The article says:
I feel the code is losing readability this way. Should I re-write each test case separately (the same way roslyn and roslyn-analyzers, and mostly any other 3rd-party library write tests)? cc: @BillWagner @sharwell |
<configuration> | ||
<packageSources> | ||
<clear /> | ||
<add key="dotnet-public" value="https://pkgs.dev.azure.com/dnceng/public/_packaging/dotnet-public/nuget/v3/index.json" /> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
📝 There's a pretty good chance parts of this won't work for people without a NuGet.org line
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sharwell This is what the latest template updates have after dotnet/roslyn-sdk#725.
I actually opened an issue dotnet/roslyn-sdk#742 for one case which this wouldn't work.
Explicitly adding nuget.org feed can cause an issue if a customer decided to rely on XliffTasks package, which doesn't exist on NuGet.org yet, but exists in dotnet feeds.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Once we resolve this question, this is ready to merge.
@sharwell, what do you recommend here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@BillWagner Is it possible to address this in a follow-up in case dotnet/roslyn-sdk#742 takes some time?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Youssef1313 @sharwell Yes, I'm happy with that plan. I'll plan on merging later today, unless Sam disagrees.
docs/csharp/roslyn-sdk/tutorials/how-to-write-csharp-analyzer-code-fix.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...nippets/how-to-write-csharp-analyzer-code-fix/MakeConst/MakeConst.Test/MakeConstUnitTests.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...nippets/how-to-write-csharp-analyzer-code-fix/MakeConst/MakeConst.Test/MakeConstUnitTests.cs
Show resolved
Hide resolved
I agree we should switch to the form everyone actually uses (as appears to now be done). |
docs/csharp/roslyn-sdk/tutorials/how-to-write-csharp-analyzer-code-fix.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…code-fix.md Co-authored-by: Sam Harwell <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a very impressive body of work @Youssef1313
Thank you! I'll now.
Fixes #23014
Fixes #22183
Fixes #20403
TODO: Completely address #17779, currently I partially addressed it.See #17779 (comment)Note: I intentionally removed the projects from dependabot config instead of updating their paths to make sure we don't upgrade while the default VS template isn't.