Skip to content

[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379

Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged

[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190

Conversation

@lambdageek

@lambdageeklambdageek commented Aug 22, 2022•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.

Fixes#70190

@ghostghost added the area-VM-meta-mono label Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek added NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) area-VM-meta-mono and removed area-VM-meta-mono labels Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek changed the title [NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek marked this pull request as ready for review August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek

lambdageek commented Aug 23, 2022•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.

Previously:
I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.

@lambdageek

lambdageek commented Aug 23, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.

@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7

@SamMonoRT

SamMonoRT commented Aug 23, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.

@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7

Yes, we should backport this change.

@runfoapprunfoappBot mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2022
Closed
This was referenced Aug 24, 2022
Open
Closed
@lambdageek

lambdageek commented Aug 24, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

/backport to release/7.0

@github-actions

github-actionsBot commented Aug 24, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914

@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2022
Merged
fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono approved these changes Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes

@fanyang-monofanyang-mono left a comment •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!

@lambdageek
lambdageek merged commit 33fddbd into dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
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;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
})();
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides by lambdageek · Pull Request #74379 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides - #74379
Merged
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Aug 25, 2022
Merged
[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overrides#74379
lambdageek merged 9 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
lambdageek:hack-gh-70190
Conversation
@lambdageek
@lambdageeklambdageek
commented
Aug 22, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Due to rearranging the logic in #64102 we already inflated the interfaces that are generic instances. Inflating again is wrong and will use the wrong generic context.
Fixes#70190
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-VM-meta-mono

label
Aug 22, 2022
@ghostghost
assigned lambdageekAug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
added

NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
area-VM-meta-mono

and removed

area-VM-meta-mono

labels
Aug 22, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
changed the title
[NO MERGE] mono inflate overrides add assertion[mono] Assert that we don't need to inflate types when applying DIM overridesAug 23, 2022
@lambdageeklambdageek
removed

NO-MERGE
The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons)
NO-REVIEW
Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it
labels
Aug 23, 2022
@lambdageek
lambdageek
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 23, 2022 19:34
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
Update they still fail. So I just added a link to their tracking issue.
Previously:

I tried to uncomment some unrelated DIM tests and they pass locally with the JIT, but I don't think I'm addressing them - so they'll probably fail on AOT or something. Just want to see if that's the case.
@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
@SamMonoRT
SamMonoRT
commented
Aug 23, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
@thaystg@vargaz this is ready for review, I think.
@SamMonoRT I think this is probably worth backporting to net7
Yes, we should backport this change.
@runfoapprunfoappBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022

Closed


This was referenced Aug 24, 2022

Open


Closed

@lambdageek
lambdageek
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

MemberAuthor
/backport to release/7.0
@github-actions
github-actionsBot
commented
Aug 24, 2022

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Started backporting to release/7.0: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/actions/runs/2921758914
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot
mentioned this pull request
Aug 24, 2022
 Merged

fanyang-mono
fanyang-mono
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-mono
left a comment
•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The change looks good to me!
@lambdageek
lambdageek
merged commit 33fddbd
into
dotnet:mainAug 25, 2022
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 24, 2022
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@thaystgthaystgthaystg approved these changes
@fanyang-monofanyang-monofanyang-mono approved these changes
@vargazvargazAwaiting requested review from vargaz
@lateralusXlateralusXAwaiting requested review from lateralusX

Assignees

@lambdageeklambdageek

Labels

area-VM-meta-mono

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


4 participants

@lambdageek@SamMonoRT@thaystg@fanyang-mono