[#RSRP-56993] Invalid parse of lambda with operators

ReSharper

Invalid parse of lambda with operators

Created: 31 Jan 08 13:21 Updated: 09 Apr 08 17:42

Component/s:

PSI - Parser

Fix Version/s:

Aroha

Security Level:

Everybody (All jira users)

Original Estimate:

Unknown

Remaining Estimate:

Unknown

Time Spent:

Unknown

Description

« Hide

class B
{
    public static bool operator >(Action<int> x, B y)
    {
        return true;
    }
    public static bool operator <(Action<int> x, B y)
    {
        return false;
    }
    
    public static void Main()
    {
        Foo(x => {} > new B());
    }

    static void Foo(bool x) { }
}

This code compiles.

All

Comments

Work Log

Change History

Sort Order:

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Vladimir Reshetnikov - 31 Jan 08 13:24

The compiler does not strictly comply with the standard here.

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Vladimir Reshetnikov - 31 Jan 08 13:35

class B
{
    public static bool operator *(Action<int> x, B y)
    {
        return true;
    }

    public static void Main()
    {
        Foo(x => { } * new B());
    }

    static void Foo(bool x) { }
}

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Eugene Pasynkov - 31 Jan 08 15:01

Though it isn't mentioned in standard, lambda with "{}" block seems to have primary expression priority

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Vladimir Reshetnikov - 31 Jan 08 15:39

This is not true, when the lambda is an operand of a cast operator, or a right oeprand of a binary operator:

var x = (Action<int>) x => {}; // error CS1525: Invalid expression term '=>'

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Eugene Pasynkov - 31 Jan 08 16:45

Pending issue till fixes either in C# specs either in c# compiler

[ Permlink | « Hide ]

Vladimir Reshetnikov - 19 Feb 08 11:03

It seems, that it is better to parse lambda with statement block as primary expression for now. Further validation can be done later, when the rules become apparent.