Parity: cite the generated surface report instead of re-asserting it - #213
Merged
Merged
Conversation
#212 made "what does Dapper.AOT do with this overload?" a derived fact, so this stops the table answering it from memory. ApiSurface.expected.txt is named as the source of truth, with the three things it deliberately does not cover - behaviour, per-call-site refusals, and non-extension statics like Format and LookupDbType, which are called rather than intercepted. Three ❓ rows are settled by the report and now cite it: Parse (all three overloads sit outside the generator's name filter), Format/ReplaceLiterals (same, and Format is not even an extension method), and CommandDefinition - which was the worst of the stale rows. It read as an unverified question about CommandFlags.Pipelined; it is in fact 27 overloads, every one skipped in silence, which is high impact rather than the "med" it carried. Split into the overload row and a separate CommandFlags row, since the second is moot until the first is fixed. The delta summary now leads with both measurements rather than one, because they answer different questions: 40 of 110 overloads tell the consumer nothing, and 677 of 793 corpus tests pass. Adds a row 0 - saying *something* at those 40 - as the cheapest item on the list: it supports no new API, and turns a silent runtime AOT failure into a build warning. Remaining ❓ now means "needs a corpus run" unless a row says otherwise.
mgravell
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 11, 2026
`state-of-play.md` is the "read first after a break" page and was the most wrong thing in the repo: it still listed #206/#207/#208 as in flight with a landing order to follow, and knew nothing of #209-#216. It now says what is true - nothing of ours in flight, the four open PRs are all external and all awaiting a decision. It also absorbs the account of **why #206 was closed**, which was sitting unmerged on the `typehandler-registration-note` branch and existed nowhere in main: gating stopped the bridge emitting for consumers who did not opt in, but the read-side check still sat in `RowFactory.GetValue<T>` - the type-flexible arm of every mapped member - so everyone paid for a feature almost nobody would enable. The emission-time fix that was considered and rejected is recorded with it, since that is the part most likely to be re-proposed. Two things promoted, because they gate real work and were buried: - the behavioural harness is local-only and does **not** exist on this machine (no `aot-harness` branch, no SQL Server, Windows-shaped repack recipe), so no phase-3 round can be closed and 677/793 cannot be re-measured until it is rebuilt; - net48 is unverified since #216 and #214, both of which changed interceptor goldens. Corrections: #117 and #162 are closed, not awaiting a decision; the `type-handler` branch harvest was filed as "before #208 settles", and #208 has settled; diagnostic ids as actually shipped (DAP053-056, next free DAP057). `parity.md`: the `CommandDefinition` row still said "27 overloads, every one skipped silently" - #214 moved the `Type`+`CommandDefinition` combinations out, so it is 21 of the 22 in that bucket. Cites the report rather than restating a number, which is what #213 was for. Also: `typehandlers-design.md` never existed in main - it was a file on the closed #206 branch - leaving dangling links in three notes. Pointed at the note that did land, `typehandler-registration.md`.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
Follow-up to #212, which made "what does Dapper.AOT do with this overload?" a derived fact. This stops
parity.mdanswering that question from memory.ApiSurface.expected.txtis named as the source of truth for API-surface status, with the three things it deliberately does not cover spelled out: behaviour, per-call-site refusals, and non-extension statics (Format,PackListParameters,LookupDbType,TypeHandlerCache<T>— called directly rather than intercepted, so the generator has no opinion and nothing measures whether they are AOT-safe when called).Parse(all three overloads sit outside the generator's name filter — emitted nothing, said nothing),Format/ReplaceLiterals(same, andFormatis not even an extension method), andCommandDefinition.CommandDefinitionwas the worst of the stale rows. It read as an unverified question aboutCommandFlags.Pipelined. It is in fact 27 overloads, every one skipped in silence — high impact, not the "med" it carried. Split into the overload row and a separateCommandFlagsrow, since the latter is moot at a call-site until the former is fixed.Remaining ❓ now means "needs a corpus run to settle" unless a row says otherwise; the few things nothing measures are marked uninstrumented in place.
Notes only — no code changes.