maxmustermann/csharplang
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Multiple typos (#565)

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
faso 2017-05-15 20:34:23 +03:00 committed by Neal Gafter
parent 0ee2415784
commit 658e65403a
1 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
proposals/records.md
View file

@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ with_expression
with_initializer_list
: with_initializer
| with_initiaizer ',' with_initializer_list
| with_initializer ',' with_initializer_list
;
with_initializer
@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ with_initializer
The token `with` is a new context-sensitive keyword.
Each *identifier* on the left of a *with_initilaizer* must bind to an accessible instance field or property of the type of the *primary_expression* of the *with_expression*. There may be no duplicated name among these identifiers of a given *with_expression*.
Each *identifier* on the left of a *with_initializer* must bind to an accessible instance field or property of the type of the *primary_expression* of the *with_expression*. There may be no duplicated name among these identifiers of a given *with_expression*.
A *with_expression* of the form
@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ At runtime the primary constructor
* executes the body of each *primary_constructor_body*, if any, in source order.
- [ ] **Open issue**: We need to specify that order, particularly across compilation units for partials.
- [ ] **Open Issue**: We need to specify that every explicitly declared constructor must chain to the primry constructor.
- [ ] **Open Issue**: We need to specify that every explicitly declared constructor must chain to the primary constructor.
- [ ] **Open issue**: Should it be allowed to change the access modifier on the primary constructor?
- [ ] **Open issue**: In a record struct, it is an error for there to be no record parameters?
@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ As with any language feature, we must question whether the additional complexity
## Alternatives
[alternatives]: #alternatives
We considered adding *primary constructors* in C# 6. Although they occupy the same syntactic surface as this proposal, we found that they fell short of the advantages offeed by records.
We considered adding *primary constructors* in C# 6. Although they occupy the same syntactic surface as this proposal, we found that they fell short of the advantages offered by records.
## Unresolved questions
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions