Skip to content

Conversation

@kentcb
Copy link
Contributor

@kentcb kentcb commented Feb 22, 2017

What kind of change does this PR introduce? (Bug fix, feature, docs update, ...)

Fixes a regression introduced recently by #1282 whereby the runtime type of the provided view model is not considered when resolving the view.

What is the current behavior? (You can also link to an open issue here)

Runtime type ignored, only generic type considered.

What is the new behavior (if this is a feature change)?

The runtime type is considered first, followed by the generic type as required.

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

No, it fixes one.

Please check if the PR fulfills these requirements

@kentcb kentcb added this to the vNext milestone Feb 22, 2017
@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 66.719% when pulling 42e5e8d on kentcb:view-locator-runtime-type into 0aab219 on reactiveui:develop.

@coveralls
Copy link

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.03%) to 66.719% when pulling d7fc6a0 on kentcb:view-locator-runtime-type into 75dfcff on reactiveui:develop.

@kentcb kentcb merged commit 67f10b0 into reactiveui:develop Feb 23, 2017
@lock lock bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 26, 2019
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.

2 participants