Skip to content

Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221

Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged

Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
kunalspathak:divrem_fix

Conversation

@kunalspathak

@kunalspathakkunalspathak commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]

@ghost

ghost commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:

This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.

@ghost

ghost commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation

Milestone:-

stephentoub
stephentoub reviewed Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
[System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
[System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?

@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)

@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•
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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.

@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021

AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.

@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027

@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)

stephentoub
stephentoub reviewed Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
internal X86Base() { }
public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
[System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?

@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.

@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.

This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.

@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.

@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.

@jkotas

jkotas commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak marked this pull request as ready for review February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4

Done.

@kunalspathakkunalspathak mentioned this pull request Feb 16, 2023
Merged
jkotas
jkotas approved these changes Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes

@jkotasjkotas left a comment

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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023
Closed
Closed
@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Feb 16, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Failures seems to be known issue.
image

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak merged commit d4c46d5 into dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak deleted the divrem_fix branch February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley added the blog-candidate Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage label Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley
, '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" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, '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('^' + ".*" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, '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('^' + ".*" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, '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" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, '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('^' + ".*" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, '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); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures by kunalspathak · Pull Request #82221 · dotnet/runtime · GitHub
Skip to content
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures - #82221
Merged
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Feb 16, 2023
Merged
Mark DivRem with RequiresPreviewFeatures#82221
kunalspathak merged 4 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:divrem_fix
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Note regarding the new-api-needs-documentation label:
This serves as a reminder for when your PR is modifying a ref *.cs file and adding/modifying public APIs, to please make sure the API implementation in the src *.cs file is documented with triple slash comments, so the PR reviewers can sign off that change.
@ghost
ghost
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/area-system-runtime-intrinsics

See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.
Issue Details
  • Adds back DivRem APIs in ref
  • Also reverts fake corelib from test project.
  • Marks DivRem with [RequiresPreviewFeatures]
Author:kunalspathak
Assignees:kunalspathak
Labels:
area-System.Runtime.Intrinsics, new-api-needs-documentation
Milestone:-
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nuint Quotient, nuint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nuint upper, nuint divisor) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
 public static (nint Quotient, nint Remainder) DivRem(nuint lower, nint upper, nint divisor) { throw null; }
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Have these APIs gone through API review?
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

Yes: #27292 (comment)
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023•

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.

I assume that you are asking about this specific overload - I do not see it in the approved set. All overloads are in the approved set - I was looking in a wrong place.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 general premise of extending the intrinsics to support nint/nuint was reviewed and approved already: #52021
AFAIR, we covered at the time in API review that any other already approved but NYI APIs were also covered by that.
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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 same general approval for nint/nuint for Arm64 was done here: #52027
@tannergoodingtannergoodingFeb 16, 2023

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.

Indeed, it's covered in the approval explicitly: #27292 (comment)
stephentoub
stephentoub
reviewed
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadsrc/libraries/System.Runtime.Intrinsics/ref/System.Runtime.Intrinsics.cs
 internal X86Base() { }
 public static bool IsSupported { get { throw null; } }
 public static (int Eax, int Ebx, int Ecx, int Edx) CpuId(int functionId, int subFunctionId) { throw null; }
 [System.Runtime.Versioning.RequiresPreviewFeaturesAttribute("DivRem is in preview.")]
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Is the plan that we ship these in .NET 8 as preview, or is the plan that by the time we ship .NET 8 it's fully supported?
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we plan to address it in .NET 8. Tracking issue #82194
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Ok. Technically every new API we add in previews is preview and doesn't require such attribution; this attribute was really intended to be used for things to remain in preview in supported releases. If we're just trying to scare people off from using it in previews, I guess it's ok, but it seems superfluous to me.
@jkotasjkotasFeb 16, 2023

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.

I agree that this would be superfluous for ordinary APIs.
This is codegen intrinsic that may require non-trivial work to complete. Tagging it as preview makes us "ready to ship" without any additional changes, even in the case we do not have a chance to complete the work for some reason. Deleting the tag once the work is complete is a small clean change.
@stephentoubstephentoubFeb 16, 2023

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.

Fair enough. Of course, we still need to remember to remove the attribute when we complete that additional work. Let's make sure to track that somewhere.
@kunalspathakkunalspathakFeb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Updated #82194 to capture it.
@jkotas
jkotas
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
February 16, 2023 18:05
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Could you please also revert the changes in this file: https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/66551/files#diff-80b8cceb2155b097a536baecd12004d4c771062e23633a35e469f0a8920d4f3cR4
Done.
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Feb 16, 2023
 Merged

jkotas
jkotas
approved these changes
Feb 16, 2023
View reviewed changes
@jkotasjkotas
left a comment


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.

Thanks

This was referenced Feb 16, 2023

Closed


Closed

@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Feb 16, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Failures seems to be known issue.
image
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
merged commit d4c46d5
into
dotnet:mainFeb 16, 2023
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
deleted the

divrem_fix

branch
February 16, 2023 21:09
@jeffhandleyjeffhandley
added
the 
blog-candidate
Completed PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coverage
label
Mar 14, 2023
@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Apr 13, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers

@stephentoubstephentoubstephentoub left review comments
@jkotasjkotasjkotas approved these changes
@tannergoodingtannergoodingtannergooding left review comments

Assignees

@kunalspathakkunalspathak

Labels

area-System.Runtime.Intrinsicsblog-candidateCompleted PRs that are candidate topics for blog post coveragenew-api-needs-documentation

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@kunalspathak@jkotas@stephentoub@tannergooding@jeffhandley