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

Add newly introduced modifiers to our csharp_preferred_modifier_order editorconfig #86668

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jun 9, 2023

Conversation

jkoritzinsky
Copy link
Member

The C# code style rule that reads this setting puts any unknown identifiers at the end of the list, which can cause confusing behavior (for example file coming after other modifiers like static instead of being at the start with the access modifiers). Update our value to add the modifiers introduced since we last wrote this.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 23, 2023

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

Issue Details

The C# code style rule that reads this setting puts any unknown identifiers at the end of the list, which can cause confusing behavior (for example file coming after other modifiers like static instead of being at the start with the access modifiers). Update our value to add the modifiers introduced since we last wrote this.

Author: jkoritzinsky
Assignees: -
Labels:

area-Infrastructure

Milestone: -

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 24, 2023

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

Issue Details

The C# code style rule that reads this setting puts any unknown identifiers at the end of the list, which can cause confusing behavior (for example file coming after other modifiers like static instead of being at the start with the access modifiers). Update our value to add the modifiers introduced since we last wrote this.

Author: jkoritzinsky
Assignees: jkoritzinsky
Labels:

area-Meta

Milestone: -

@jkoritzinsky
Copy link
Member Author

Updated from main as there may have been usages of the current ordering rules that have crept in (such as the usages where I found this case) that I would need to fix before merging.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants