Make accessor required for table-level index defs in C##4541
Merged
clockwork-labs-bot merged 1 commit intomasterfrom Mar 4, 2026
Merged
Make accessor required for table-level index defs in C##4541clockwork-labs-bot merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
clockwork-labs-bot merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
Conversation
rekhoff
approved these changes
Mar 3, 2026
Contributor
rekhoff
left a comment
rekhoff
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. I have not tested this locally, but the test cases provided appear to validate correctly.
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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Description of Changes
Make
Accessora required argument for table-level index defs in C# to align with rust and typescript. The same change was done for typescript in #4525.API and ABI breaking changes
Technically breaks the module api, although I believe this is the behavior that is outlined in the spec, and so the current behavior should really be considered a bug.
Expected complexity level and risk
1
Testing
Added negative compile tests