Bug 2805 - No completion offered when creating a Lazy<T>
Summary: No completion offered when creating a Lazy<T>
Alias: None
Product: Xamarin Studio
Classification: Desktop
Component: C# Binding ()
Version: Trunk
Hardware: PC Mac OS
: Normal normal
Target Milestone: master
Assignee: Mike Krüger
Depends on:
Reported: 2012-01-09 11:21 UTC by Alan McGovern
Modified: 2015-08-20 03:24 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

Tags: resolver
Is this bug a regression?: ---
Last known good build:

Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in read-only mode.

Please join us on Visual Studio Developer Community and in the Xamarin and Mono organizations on GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related Links.

Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we make these adjustments and improvements for the future.

Please create a new report on Developer Community or GitHub with your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.

Related Links:

Description Alan McGovern 2012-01-09 11:21:54 UTC
1) Start writing "Lazy". MonoDevelop does not indicate that this is a generic type.

MonoDevelop should show that there are two classes named 'Lazy'. The first takes a single type paramater, the second takes two type parameters. (Lazy<T> and Lazy<T, TMetadata>).

2) MonoDevelop offers no completion for the type Lazy<T, TMetadata> when trying to invoke a constructor of this type.

New resolver branch, b00a2d77b
Comment 1 Mike Krüger 2012-01-31 06:25:42 UTC

btw. where is Lazy<T, T1> defined - I really can't find where it's defined.
Comment 3 Alan McGovern 2012-01-31 09:03:26 UTC
Which explains why I didn't get completion for it :p It's actually in a completely different assembly. Bizarre!
Comment 4 Mike Krüger 2012-01-31 10:38:37 UTC
:) ... yes, but the template parameter completion was broken - which is what the bug really is about.