Multiple typos (#565)
This commit is contained in:
Родитель
0ee2415784
Коммит
658e65403a
|
@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ with_expression
|
|||
|
||||
with_initializer_list
|
||||
: with_initializer
|
||||
| with_initiaizer ',' with_initializer_list
|
||||
| with_initializer ',' with_initializer_list
|
||||
;
|
||||
|
||||
with_initializer
|
||||
|
@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ with_initializer
|
|||
|
||||
The token `with` is a new context-sensitive keyword.
|
||||
|
||||
Each *identifier* on the left of a *with_initilaizer* must bind to an accessible instance field or property of the type of the *primary_expression* of the *with_expression*. There may be no duplicated name among these identifiers of a given *with_expression*.
|
||||
Each *identifier* on the left of a *with_initializer* must bind to an accessible instance field or property of the type of the *primary_expression* of the *with_expression*. There may be no duplicated name among these identifiers of a given *with_expression*.
|
||||
|
||||
A *with_expression* of the form
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ At runtime the primary constructor
|
|||
* executes the body of each *primary_constructor_body*, if any, in source order.
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] **Open issue**: We need to specify that order, particularly across compilation units for partials.
|
||||
- [ ] **Open Issue**: We need to specify that every explicitly declared constructor must chain to the primry constructor.
|
||||
- [ ] **Open Issue**: We need to specify that every explicitly declared constructor must chain to the primary constructor.
|
||||
- [ ] **Open issue**: Should it be allowed to change the access modifier on the primary constructor?
|
||||
- [ ] **Open issue**: In a record struct, it is an error for there to be no record parameters?
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -492,7 +492,7 @@ As with any language feature, we must question whether the additional complexity
|
|||
## Alternatives
|
||||
[alternatives]: #alternatives
|
||||
|
||||
We considered adding *primary constructors* in C# 6. Although they occupy the same syntactic surface as this proposal, we found that they fell short of the advantages offeed by records.
|
||||
We considered adding *primary constructors* in C# 6. Although they occupy the same syntactic surface as this proposal, we found that they fell short of the advantages offered by records.
|
||||
|
||||
## Unresolved questions
|
||||
[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
|
||||
|
|
Загрузка…
Ссылка в новой задаче