diff --git a/meetings/2018/LDM-2018-01-03.md b/meetings/2018/LDM-2018-01-03.md index 57e2578..ee0bc9f 100644 --- a/meetings/2018/LDM-2018-01-03.md +++ b/meetings/2018/LDM-2018-01-03.md @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ We should allow expression variables in queries, but keep them scoped to the ind [csharplang/issues/287](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/287) -The [proposal](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/caller-argument-expression.md) calls for an extra parameter with a default value (which is then replaced by the expression passed as an argument for the parameter designated in the attribute). This means that in a tie breaker situation, existing methods would match better than new ones that differ only by having this extra argument. +The [proposal](https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/caller-argument-expression.md) calls for an extra parameter with a default value (which is then replaced by the expression passed as an argument for the parameter designated in the attribute). This means that in a tie breaker situation, existing methods would match better than new ones that differ only by having this extra argument. There are solutions to that for API owners: diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-02-22.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-02-22.md index 0c56027..3547914 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-02-22.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-02-22.md @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ ### Global `using`s -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/GlobalUsingDirective.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/GlobalUsingDirective.md Today we discussed the proposed syntax and restrictions on the current feature specification. As checked in today, the proposal puts `global` after the `using` directive, which could be potentially ambiguous and require complicated parsing logic, as `global` diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-03.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-03.md index 3af1696..dd8d2c3 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-03.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-03.md @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ ### Natural type for lambdas -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md Today we looked at a proposal around enhancing lambda expressions and method groups with a "natural type", which is helpful for several ASP.NET scenarios. Overall, the LDM has general support for making enhancements here: explaining how lambdas and method groups don't have diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-10.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-10.md index c13b5d4..8e745af 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-10.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-10.md @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ We do like both of these proposals and want them both in the language, but will ### Parameterless struct constructors -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/master/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md Finally today, we looked at the proposal for parameterless constructors. This proposal needs to make sure that it can handle what the general .NET ecosystem can do with struct constructors today, including private struct constructors. diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-29.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-29.md index e20b50e..6e8cde0 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-29.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-03-29.md @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ ### Parameterless struct constructors -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md Today, we took a look at open questions in this proposal. @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ reflect more nuances, but we approve of the general goal: keep behavior unchange ### AsyncMethodBuilder -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/async-method-builders.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/async-method-builders.md We started today by questioning whether we can simplify this proposal a bit. Today, the proposal covers both a scoped version and a single-method version. The scoped version is complicated, and has a number of downsides: diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-12.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-12.md index b63d6bb..3e152dc 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-12.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-12.md @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ framework to `Slice` before it ships, would enable the feature in a much more ge ### Lambda improvements -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md After some implementation work, this proposal is back to look at some more changes. One of the big ones is moving the return type to the left side of the parameter list. This makes the syntax analogous to our other signature declarations in C#, looking like an unnamed version of a diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-21.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-21.md index caffb3a..5074eaf 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-21.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-21.md @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ ### Inferred types for lambdas and method groups -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/issues/4674 Further implementation work has revealed a few potential breaking changes in giving lambdas and method groups a natural type (linked in the issue diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-28.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-28.md index 8891e9d..5ac1781 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-28.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-04-28.md @@ -13,8 +13,8 @@ ### Open questions in record and parameterless structs -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/record-structs.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/struct-ctor-more/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/record-structs.md #### Initializers with explicit constructors diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-02.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-02.md index ad7dc86..f29460c 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-02.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-02.md @@ -64,7 +64,7 @@ Existing proposal is accepted with the following clarifications: #### Lambda return type parsing -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md In a previous LDM, we decided that lambda return types should go before the parameter list, as in `ReturnType (ParamType param) => { ... }`. This has presented some challenging parsing scenarios. diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-07.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-07.md index 776e50e..31dc26c 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-07.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-07.md @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ ### Runtime checks for parameterless struct constructors -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/parameterless-struct-constructors.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/parameterless-struct-constructors.md In testing parameterless struct constructors, we've found a new bug with `Activator.CreateInstance()` on older frameworks. This code will print `True, False` on .NET Framework 4.8: diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-21.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-21.md index 7e12a79..f90f86e 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-21.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-06-21.md @@ -15,7 +15,7 @@ ### Open questions for lambda return types -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md #### Method type inference from return types diff --git a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-07-26.md b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-07-26.md index fa42273..5ebd422 100644 --- a/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-07-26.md +++ b/meetings/2021/LDM-2021-07-26.md @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ ### Lambda conversion to System.Delegate -https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/lambda-improvements.md +https://github.com/dotnet/csharplang/blob/main/proposals/csharp-10.0/lambda-improvements.md We've received a few bug reports from customers on upgrading to a new version of the preview SDK that existing code, targeting .NET 5, was now failing to compile because code that previously chose an extension method with a strongly-typed delegate type was now binding to an instance method that took a `Delegate` instead.