Skip to content

Conversation

@manofstick
Copy link
Contributor

As proposed in this comment this should be a prelude to that #2587 - if this PR is merged and #2587 rebased then it should be provide a simpler set of diffs.

No functionality or change in logic is modified with this PR, it is just a split of the code that is from the seq.fs(i) files.

This has some benefit even without #2587 as it provides a physical separation of functionality that is used by the compiler for implementation of seq computational expressions that is shared with the Seq module.

Paul Westcott and others added 2 commits March 12, 2017 05:31
@KevinRansom
Copy link
Contributor

@jack-pappas --- in principle I like this split regardless of the outcome of iseq.

It will take a while to review it I'm afraid.

Kevin

member x.Dispose() = ()

let Empty<'T> () = (new EmptyEnumerator<'T>() :> IEnumerator<'T>)
module Internal =
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is a bit idiosyncratic ...

perhaps if you renamed the namespace containing SeqCore to Microsoft.FSharp.Collections.SeqCore and opened Microsoft.FSharp.Collections.SeqCore.IEnumerable? Then maybe not jam in a new module.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just trying to minimize lines code changed; maybe module naming could at least serve as as a temporary names until this is consumed?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm OK with this as a transitional step in rearranging the code with minimal diff

@KevinRansom KevinRansom merged commit 492eeb8 into dotnet:master Mar 14, 2017
cloudRoutine pushed a commit to cloudRoutine/fsharp that referenced this pull request Mar 19, 2017
* Split seq.fs(i) in preperation for iseq

* Made mkConcatSeq internal

Don't polute surface area
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants