These are chat archives for Microsoft/CodeContracts

3rd
Feb 2016
Yaakov
@yaakov-h
Feb 03 2016 04:19
@SergeyTeplyakov I've just opened a handful of pull reqs for system contracts. I've confirmed that the build passes (on top of AppVeyor's proof) and that these have the desired influence on the static analysis.
Sergey Teplyakov
@SergeyTeplyakov
Feb 03 2016 05:41
@yaakov-h Great job! I already merged some of them and will merge the rest soon!
Yaakov
@yaakov-h
Feb 03 2016 06:23
@SergeyTeplyakov Thanks. Also, have you given #301 any thought? That's currently a blocker for me to upgrade to 1.10, and I don't even know where to begin looking to try solve that.
Sergey Teplyakov
@SergeyTeplyakov
Feb 03 2016 07:32
Regarding #301. I've made a quick look, but was unable to find out the issue... If the problem is really in #171, we can try to rallback this change (locally) to proof this assumption...
Yaakov
@yaakov-h
Feb 03 2016 22:01
Git blame pins it down to 24192e6 which was part of #171.
It looks like the static checker can't prove anything about field.IsStatic, but it does know that expression != null, so only the second contracts is failing
I'll try pulling those two out and seeing how it goes