Fix regression in name resolution in parameter #38351
Merged
+16
−1
Conversation
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
weswigham
approved these changes
May 6, 2020
RyanCavanaugh
approved these changes
May 6, 2020
|
@typescript-bot cherry-pick this to release-3.9 |
|
Heya @RyanCavanaugh, I've started to run the task to cherry-pick this into |
|
Hey @RyanCavanaugh, I've opened #38364 for you. |
typescript-bot
pushed a commit
to typescript-bot/TypeScript
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2020
Component commits: 39e6856 Fix regression in name resolution in parameter
DanielRosenwasser
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 8, 2020
🤖 Pick PR #38351 (Fix regression in name resolution i...) into release-3.9
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This ensures we don't overwrite
associatedDeclarationForContainingInitializerOrBindingNameinresolveNameHelperso we can be sure we have the correct associated declaration.Fixes #38243