Skip to content

Conversation

@sharwell
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@sharwell sharwell requested review from a team as code owners March 26, 2019 20:47
Copy link
Member

@jaredpar jaredpar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My review here was readonly, no comments were written.

Copy link
Member

@jasonmalinowski jasonmalinowski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jaredpar I assume there's no crazy way that adding 'readonly' is an API breaking change?

@sharwell
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jasonmalinowski removing it would be, but adding shouldn't cause problems

@jasonmalinowski
Copy link
Member

@sharwell: I'm just always paranoid because I've had the compiler team tell me things are safe, only to then be broken by them. 😄

@jaredpar
Copy link
Member

In short this change is fine and should be merged. More generally though the rule of thumb is the following:

If I can add readonly to my struct definition and the code compiles there are no compat concerns

@sharwell sharwell merged commit 99771f5 into dotnet:master Mar 28, 2019
@sharwell sharwell deleted the readonly-structs branch March 28, 2019 21:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants