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

string.Join with first element null status #86823

Closed
miloush opened this issue May 26, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

string.Join with first element null status #86823

miloush opened this issue May 26, 2023 · 5 comments

Comments

@miloush
Copy link
Contributor

miloush commented May 26, 2023

Reference issue: #5681 PR: dotnet/coreclr#8114

What a debugging nightmare having this behave differently in net6.0 and net48 targets indeed!

@stephentoub said:

As long as we port the fix back to desktop (under a quirk I guess, in particular since the behavior is documented) and fix the documentation, I'm ok with it.

It seems to me this breaking change has been sneaked in without fulfilling the stated conditions. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.string.join?view=net-8.0#system-string-join(system-string-system-object()) still contains the remark and note for .NET 8.0 Preview 4 that empty string should be returned which it isn't, and targetting net481 still does return empty string. Has it been poretd back to desktop? If a quirk setting is available, it should be mentioned in the .NET Framework documentation as well.

@dotnet-issue-labeler dotnet-issue-labeler bot added the needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners label May 26, 2023
@ghost ghost added the untriaged New issue has not been triaged by the area owner label May 26, 2023
@huoyaoyuan
Copy link
Member

This should be a bug-to-bug compatibility for .NET Framework. It won't be fixed on .NET Framework, since all applications depends on this bug will be infected.

@miloush
Copy link
Contributor Author

miloush commented May 27, 2023

None of the issues mentions reversing the decision to backport the "fix". Either way the documentation should be fixed.

@stephentoub
Copy link
Member

That discussion is from the earliest days of .NET Core, before we decided we were effectively not backporting anything.

@danmoseley danmoseley added area-System.Runtime and removed needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners labels May 27, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 27, 2023

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

Issue Details

Reference issue: #5681 PR: dotnet/coreclr#8114

What a debugging nightmare having this behave differently in net6.0 and net48 targets indeed!

@stephentoub said:

As long as we port the fix back to desktop (under a quirk I guess, in particular since the behavior is documented) and fix the documentation, I'm ok with it.

It seems to me this breaking change has been sneaked in without fulfilling the stated conditions. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.string.join?view=net-8.0#system-string-join(system-string-system-object()) still contains the remark and note for .NET 8.0 Preview 4 that empty string should be returned which it isn't, and targetting net481 still does return empty string. Has it been poretd back to desktop? If a quirk setting is available, it should be mentioned in the .NET Framework documentation as well.

Author: miloush
Assignees: -
Labels:

area-System.Runtime, untriaged

Milestone: -

@tannergooding
Copy link
Member

As per the above, it was determined .NET Framework isn't getting new features like this.

@tannergooding tannergooding closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Jul 21, 2023
@ghost ghost removed the untriaged New issue has not been triaged by the area owner label Jul 21, 2023
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 20, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants