Skip to content

Fix shouldBeParenthesizedInContext for Sequential in record fields (#17826) #19850

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
T-Gro wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+17 −0
Open

Fix shouldBeParenthesizedInContext for Sequential in record fields (#17826) #19850

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
99c62b0
Add failing tests for Sequential in record/anon-record (#17826)
May 28, 2026
30e8ba9
Fix shouldBeParenthesizedInContext for Sequential in record fields (#…
May 28, 2026
4e42022
Format and release notes for #17826 fix
May 28, 2026
1aca6e5
Merge branch 'main' into fix/issue-17826
T-Gro May 29, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions docs/release-notes/.FSharp.Compiler.Service/11.0.100.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,7 @@
* Reference assembly MVIDs are now deterministic across compiler invocations. Previously, `--refout` / `<ProduceReferenceAssembly>true</ProduceReferenceAssembly>` produced a different MVID every build because the implied signature hash used .NET's randomized `String.GetHashCode()`. ([Issue #19751](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/issues/19751), [PR #19801](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/pull/19801))
* Parser: recover on unfinished if and binary expressions
([PR #19724](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/pull/19724))
* Fix `SynExpr.shouldBeParenthesizedInContext` to report parentheses as required around `SynExpr.Sequential` expressions used as record or anonymous-record field values, so the IDE "remove unnecessary parentheses" analyzer no longer breaks code like `{| A = ((); B = 3) |}`. ([Issue #17826](https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/issues/17826))

### Added

Expand Down
5 changes: 5 additions & 0 deletions src/Compiler/Service/SynExpr.fs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1093,6 +1093,11 @@ module SynExpr =
| SynInterpolatedStringPart.FillExpr(qualifiers = Some _) -> true
| _ -> false)

// {| A = (1; 2) |}
// { A = (1; 2) }
// Removing the parens would let the semicolon be parsed as a field separator.
| (SynExpr.Record _ | SynExpr.AnonRecd _), SynExpr.Sequential _ -> true

// { (!x) with … }
| SynExpr.Record(copyInfo = Some(SynExpr.Paren(expr = Is inner), _)),
SynExpr.App(isInfix = false; funcExpr = FuncExpr.SymbolicOperator(StartsWith('!' | '~')))
Expand Down
11 changes: 11 additions & 0 deletions tests/FSharp.Compiler.Service.Tests/SynExprTests.fs
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -58,6 +58,17 @@ let exprs: obj array list =
}
"
|]
// https://github.com/dotnet/fsharp/issues/17826
// Sequential expressions used as record / anonymous record field values
// require their enclosing parentheses - otherwise the semicolon is parsed
// as a field separator.
[|[Needed]; "{| A = (1; 2) |}"|]
[|[Needed]; "{ A = (1; 2) }"|]
[|[Needed]; "{| A = ((); B = 3) |}"|]
[|[Needed]; "{| A = (printfn \"hi\"; 3) |}"|]
[|[Needed]; "{ existing with A = (1; 2) }"|]
[|[Needed; Needed]; "{| A = (1; 2); B = (3; 4) |}"|]
[|[Needed; Unneeded]; "{ Outer = ({ Inner = (1; 2) }) }"|]
]

#if !NET6_0_OR_GREATER
Expand Down
Loading