Handle comparers for nullable value types in primitive collections #35235
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Fixes #35117 In general, value comparers for value type should target the non-nullable variant of the type. This is because we automatically handle null values internally. However, in this case, a comparer for a nullable tpe was created, which was then used with a collection of non-nullable types. The fix is to use the nullable list comparer if the underlying comparer is for a nullable value type.
roji
approved these changes
Nov 30, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #35117
In general, value comparers for value type should target the non-nullable variant of the type. This is because we automatically handle null values internally. However, in this case, a comparer for a nullable tpe was created, which was then used with a collection of non-nullable types. The fix is to use the nullable list comparer if the underlying comparer is for a nullable value type.