Add option for controlling constructor generation #79
Conversation
This file contains 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
Closed
|
@andrewlock any chance you can have a look at this soon? I think it'll be a really useful addition |
|
Resolved the prior conflicts, and thanks to the work in #95 the diff is significantly smaller now. |
|
Closing due to the underlying implementation changing to use templates where the constructor can be controlled. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Implements #75
I had thought about adding additional options to the
StronglyTypedIdImplementationsenum. Since that enum is defined as[Flags]then it would make for a confusing API as it would be possible to specify multiple constructor visibility levels (e.g.StronglyTypedImplementations.PrivateConstructor | StronglyTypedImplementations.PublicConstructor, hence why this option is a separate enum.