[release/5.0-rc2] Fix argument name in CompareInfo.IsPrefix (suffix -> prefix) #41842
Conversation
This file contains 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
![github-actions[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
|
I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this PR. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label. |
tarekgh
approved these changes
Sep 3, 2020
|
👍 |
jeffhandley
added
Servicing-approved
|
failure was #41078 |
ghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Backport of #41803 to release/5.0-rc2
/cc @jeffhandley @krwq
Customer Impact
This
CompareInfo.IsPrefix()API was added earlier in 5.0, but there is a mistake in the argument name wheresuffixwas used instead ofprefix. The implementation is correct, but the ref assembly is wrong. Renaming this argument name while we're still in 5.0 fixes that mistake before it becomes a breaking change.Testing
PR reviews and verification that this API was added during 5.0.
Risk
Low. It's possible someone already has a dependency on this API and they are using the named argument, and therefore this will cause a break for them. That would be acceptable during 5.0.