Suppress IDE0031

[NikolaMilosavljevic]

IDE0031 warnings were turned into errors in VMR build, with the latest SDK and compiler - dotnet/sdk#48226

D:\a\_work\1\vmr\src\winforms\src\System.Private.Windows.Core\src\System\Private\Windows\Ole\FormatEnumerator.cs(59,13): error IDE0031: Null check can be simplified (https://learn.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/style-rules/ide0031) [D:\a\_work\1\vmr\src\winforms\src\System.Private.Windows.Core\src\System.Private.Windows.Core.csproj::TargetFramework=net8.0]
D:\a\_work\1\vmr\src\winforms\src\System.Private.Windows.Core\src\System\Private\Windows\Ole\FormatEnumerator.cs(77,9): error IDE0031: Null check can be simplified (https://learn.microsoft.com/dotnet/fundamentals/code-analysis/style-rules/ide0031) [D:\a\_work\1\vmr\src\winforms\src\System.Private.Windows.Core\src\System.Private.Windows.Core.csproj::TargetFramework=net8.0]

Microsoft Reviewers: Open in CodeFlow

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 61.78286%. Comparing base (851d52d) to head (222d030).
Report is 6 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                 Coverage Diff                  @@
##                main      #13260          +/-   ##
====================================================
+ Coverage   39.78342%   61.78286%   +21.99944%     
====================================================
  Files           1018        1552         +534     
  Lines          96407      158947       +62540     
  Branches       13451       14802        +1351     
====================================================
+ Hits           38354       98202       +59848     
- Misses         57654       60029        +2375     
- Partials         399         716         +317     

Flag	Coverage Δ
Debug	61.78286% <ø> (+21.99943%)	⬆️
integration	10.71507% <ø> (-0.01221%)	⬇️
production	39.79814% <ø> (+0.01471%)	⬆️
test	95.67018% <ø> (?)
unit	37.24638% <ø> (+0.02294%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[Tanya-Solyanik]

@NikolaMilosavljevic - this analyzer is already enabled as a warning -

winforms/.editorconfig

Line 186 in b5bb513

dotnet_diagnostic.IDE0031.severity = warning

and warnings are treated as errors.
I suppose Roslyn and analyzers have been updated to preview4 in the unified build and you now support ? in L-values feature?
But then I don't understand why these 2 are the only spots that broke your build? When I bump up SDK to P4, I get 51 errors.
I would prefer disabling this analyzer conditionally on the unified build in the corresponding project files, as I prefer applying the new syntax - pceltFetched?[0] = 0; eventually when we get the P4 SDK to pragmas in the source code.

[NikolaMilosavljevic]

@NikolaMilosavljevic - this analyzer is already enabled as a warning -

winforms/.editorconfig

Line 186 in b5bb513

dotnet_diagnostic.IDE0031.severity = warning

and warnings are treated as errors.
I suppose Roslyn and analyzers have been updated to preview4 in the unified build and you now support ? in L-values feature?
But then I don't understand why these 2 are the only spots that broke your build? When I bump up SDK to P4, I get 51 errors.
I would prefer disabling this analyzer conditionally on the unified build in the corresponding project files, as I prefer applying the new syntax - pceltFetched?[0] = 0; eventually when we get the P4 SDK to pragmas in the source code.

Yeah, once I disabled these 3 initial errors, I got 51 more errors, which is odd. I agree that we could probably disable this error per project, based on if we are building in VMR. Eventually new syntax could be applied once this repo moves to P4 SDK/compiler.

I'll update the PR.

[Tanya-Solyanik]

Thank you!