[Version 9.0] Feature support for top level statements#1454
Draft
BillWagner wants to merge 2 commits into
Draft
Conversation
BillWagner
force-pushed
the
v9-toplevel-statements
branch
from
November 6, 2025 20:05
d872f61 to
07946a2
Compare
Contributor
|
@BillWagner There is one grammar change: the extension of compilation_unit to allow |
BillWagner
changed the title
RexJaeschke
reviewed
Jan 22, 2026
Comment on lines
+774
to
+775
| - The scope of a name defined by an *extern_alias_directive* ([§14.4](namespaces.md#144-extern-alias-directives)) extends over the *using_directive*s, *global_attributes*, *statement_list*s, and *namespace_member_declaration*s of its immediately containing *compilation_unit* or *namespace_body*. An *extern_alias_directive* does not contribute any new members to the underlying declaration space. In other words, an *extern_alias_directive* is not transitive, but, rather, affects only the *compilation_unit* or *namespace_body* in which it occurs. | ||
| - The scope of a name defined or imported by a *using_directive* ([§14.5](namespaces.md#145-using-directives)) extends over the *global_attributes*, *statement_list*s, and *namespace_member_declaration*s of the *compilation_unit* or *namespace_body* in which the *using_directive* occurs. A *using_directive* may make zero or more namespace or type names available within a particular *compilation_unit* or *namespace_body*, but does not contribute any new members to the underlying declaration space. In other words, a *using_directive* is not transitive but rather affects only the *compilation_unit* or *namespace_body* in which it occurs. |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I just made these two edits (after working on the V10 feature "File-Scoped Namespaces," which further changes these two bullet items). Now that top-level statements (statement_lists) are permitted immediately before namespace_member_declarations, we need to make sure those statements are in the scope of these two directives.
BillWagner
force-pushed
the
v9-toplevel-statements
branch
from
April 10, 2026 19:14
b9bed76 to
197acef
Compare
BillWagner
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 10, 2026
BillWagner
force-pushed
the
v9-toplevel-statements
branch
from
May 12, 2026 19:13
197acef to
ade6460
Compare
Add support for top-level statements Add support for top-level statements fix md formatting tweak generated entry-point signature table Update basic-concepts.md Add mention of attribute System.Runtime.CompilerServices.CallerMemberName mention invoking method in top-level statement situation fix link
BillWagner
force-pushed
the
v9-toplevel-statements
branch
from
June 24, 2026 17:45
ade6460 to
db48965
Compare
Member
Author
|
An earlier version of this feature is already present on |
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.
This PR contains the work for Top-level statements in C# 9.
The commits from #980 were squashed to the first commit on this branch.
The ANTLR grammar is failing. I admit I'm not sure why. There are no grammar changes in this PR.