Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995

Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged

Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

Conversation

@Evangelink

@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink) commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Adds a regression test for #8984.

The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.

This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.

Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.

Fixes#8984.

@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI review requested due to automatic review settings June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI reviewed Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes

CopilotAI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.

Changes:

  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.

Copilot's findings

  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged commit adf347f into microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026
31 of 33 checks passed
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) deleted the dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor branch June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor

2 participants

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink

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

Skip to content
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984) - #8995
Merged
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Jun 10, 2026
Merged
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestContext field capture (#8984)#8995
Amaury Levé (Evangelink) merged 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom 
Evangelink:dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor
Conversation
@Evangelink
@EvangelinkAmaury Levé (Evangelink)
commented
Jun 10, 2026

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Member
Adds a regression test for #8984.
The scenario reported in the issue — capturing a TestContext primary-constructor parameter into a private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; field — no longer triggers MSTEST0005. This was fixed implicitly by #8629 (MSTEST0005: Stop reporting on fields of type TestContext), which removed all TestContext-field validation from the analyzer.
This PR just locks the behavior in with a dedicated test that mirrors the exact snippet from the issue, so we don't regress the user-facing pattern again.
Verified locally: the new test plus the entire TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests class (67/67) pass on net8.0.
Fixes#8984.
@Evangelink
Add regression test for MSTEST0005 with primary-constructor TestConte…
b349d87
…xt field capture (microsoft#8984)
Captures the scenario from microsoft#8984 where a TestContext primary-constructor parameter is assigned to a private readonly field via a field initializer. The analyzer no longer reports MSTEST0005 in this case (fixed by microsoft#8629, which stopped MSTEST0005 from validating TestContext fields).
Co-authored-by: Copilot <223556219+Copilot@users.noreply.github.com>
CopilotAI
review requested due to automatic review settings
June 10, 2026 08:40
CopilotAI
reviewed
Jun 10, 2026
View reviewed changes
CopilotAI
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview
This PR adds a regression test in the MSTest analyzer unit test suite to ensure MSTEST0005 does not report a diagnostic when a primary-constructor TestContext parameter is captured into a readonly field, matching the user-reported pattern from #8984.
Changes:
  • Add a new unit test covering private readonly TestContext _testContext = testContext; inside a [TestClass] with a primary constructor.
  • Assert the scenario produces no MSTEST0005 diagnostic, locking in the behavior introduced by #8629 (no field validation for MSTEST0005).
Show a summary per file
FileDescription
test/UnitTests/MSTest.Analyzers.UnitTests/TestContextShouldBeValidAnalyzerTests.csAdds a dedicated no-diagnostic regression test for the primary-constructor parameter → field capture scenario from #8984.
Copilot's findings
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
merged commit adf347f
into
microsoft:mainJun 10, 2026

31 of 33 checks passed

@Evangelink
Amaury Levé (Evangelink)
deleted the

dev/amauryleve/test-8984-mstest0005-primary-ctor

branch
June 10, 2026 09:26
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

Copilot code reviewCopilot
Copilot review effort
Applies to this pull request for everyone.Learn more about Copilot code review.
Copilot left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MSTEST0005 false-positive when assigning TestContext to a field via a primary constructor


2 participants

@Evangelink