ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions

, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

ILLink analyzer handling of IL3003 on properties and events #83235

Description

@vitek-karas

This is currently only about RequiresAssemblyFiles as it's allowed on properties and events. RequiresUnreferencedCode and RequiresDynamicCode are not allowed on properties and events (yet - #83194).

Take this as an example:

classBase{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;[RequiresAssemblyFiles("setter")]set;}}classDerived{[RequiresAssemblyFiles("property")]publicintMyProperty{get;set;// IL3003 - the Derived.MyProperty.set doesn't have the attribute while Base.MyProperty.set does}}

Basically the analyzer treats the property and the methods as separate entities and validates the mismatch of the attribute on each separately. But the semantics of the attribute are that if it's on the property it's as if it applies to both accessors.
So from a single-file compatibility, the above example is perfectly compatible, as on 4 accessors will produce IL3002 when called as all 4 fall under the property-level attribute.

There are other similar variations of this, where setting on property on Base and then setting it on both accessors in derived still causes warnings (and vice versa).

NativeAOT will implement this by looking at methods only, so the above will not produce a warning. As in the end the behavior on method level is what actually causes single-file incompatibility.

We should change the analyzer to this behavior as well - it should basically warn less. There's a small chance of breaks if somebody suppresses the warning using pragmas (which nobody should do on this warning really) and only scope it to the property declaration without including the accessors. I would be surprised if that actually happens even once.

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

area-Tools-ILLink.NET linker development as well as trimming analyzers

Type

No type

Projects

  • Status
    No status

Milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions