(Not)Be(Abstract|Sealed|Static) class assertions implemented#796
Conversation
|
Looks good to me. The only minor thing that caught me eyes was that:
We aren't entirely consistent in what we use.
|
-because clause fixed according to the review -docs updated
|
@jnyrup Thanks, fixed. Also I've added two examples to the docs. |
|
It just struck me that from a C# perspective the keywords Several assertions in |
|
So? You want to have some changea made to this PR? |
|
Yes, I would like to have a check that the This is similar to what we do in Calling |
|
@jnyrup @dennisdoomen |
|
I really like your use of |
|
@jnyrup Done. Thanks for the reviews! |
For #645
Assertions for types (abstract, sealed, static) added. They are based on C# understanding of those keywords, as in CLR they differ.