Support GenericInstance types in inline method signatures #565
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Currently, Harmony can't patch nor
MethodCopier.GetInstructionsof methods withcalliinstructions containing generic instances in their signature such as in this example:Patching or calling
GetInstructionson such methods results in:This is a rare but legitimate case that's come up in something I'm working on. Note that this isn't about open generics (like
List<T>, which Harmony doesn't really support) but closed ones (e.g.List<int>).The pull request fixes this issue by adding support for type signature elements of kind
GenericInstancein the inline signature parser. The patch is directly based on Mono.Cecil's implementation: https://github.com/jbevain/cecil/blob/96026325ee1cb6627a3e4a32b924ab2905f02553/Mono.Cecil/AssemblyReader.cs#L3424This change purely expands the set of patchable methods so poses no backwards compatibility concerns.