Conversation
anjo76
added
enhancement
Owner
|
I've decided not to accept AI generated code contributions, see CONTRIBUTING.md I'll look into the enhancement but this pull request will be rejected. |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR makes it so that compound property accessors work with both scoped reference types as well as value types. It includes full test coverage.
Full disclosure - an llm helped with initial implementation of this PR (I saw no contribution guideline forbidding this), and I've opted to leave it's overaggressive comments in place during first draft because, though I verified the output using multiple live codebases as well as insuring that full test coverage succeeds, I can admit that this would have been a lot for me to learn on my own in short notice - and thus the LLM explained some of it's thought process better than I can. Totally happy to remove the comments or make any other changes necessary if this was done in the correct way. If the LLM did anything blaitently wrong in a way I can't detect not having developed the codebase, I'd be happy to try improving the situation given instruction.
Thanks for the great library and for considering these improvements!