Nested Editor<T> Null Reference Exception. Fix a bug in the HtmlFieldPrefix.cs:23 #58888
+1
−1
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
This a fix for nested Editor<T> described in this issue: dotnet#53956
dotnet-issue-labeler
bot
added
the
area-blazor
dotnet-policy-service
bot
added
the
community-contribution
|
Thanks for your PR, @sgarnovsky. Someone from the team will get assigned to your PR shortly and we'll get it reviewed. |
|
Looks like this PR hasn't been active for some time and the codebase could have been changed in the meantime. |
dotnet-policy-service
bot
added
the
pending-ci-rerun
pavelsavara
approved these changes
Nov 25, 2024
|
this may need backports to 8 and 9 cc @javiercn |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Actually, a null reference exception occurs when a nested Editor.NameFor() or child component based on InputBase is used. The referenced bug issue has a sample to reproduce this problem.
The fix is a quite simple and probably doesn't require any test unit as an original issue looks like an indexing reference misprint.
It will fix #53956