Add overload resolution priority

[Cheesebaron]

It is way too easy to hit the signature for the extension Format(string pattern, object data), since a Dictionary is also an object.

I suggest that [OverloadResolutionPriority(-1)] is added to give it less priority.

Additionally, I would warn users that it does reflection in the code behind, which is not compatible with platforms such as net-ios and net-android if you want to use NativeAOT.

[jeffijoe]

Good point. We should also slap on [RequiresUnreferencedCode]. The README does mention that the object-based overload uses reflection, though.

[Cheesebaron]

If you want I can contribute these changes.

[jeffijoe]

That would be great!

[jeffijoe]

Does OverloadResolutionPriority work on older .NET versions?

[Cheesebaron]

It can be polyfilled by adding an attribute in the project. Something like this:

namespace System.Runtime.CompilerServices;

/// <summary>
/// Specifies the priority of a member in overload resolution. When unspecified, the default priority is 0.
/// </summary>
[AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method | AttributeTargets.Constructor | AttributeTargets.Property, AllowMultiple = false, Inherited = false)]
internal sealed class OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute : Attribute
{
    /// <summary>
    /// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute"/> class.
    /// </summary>
    /// <param name="priority">The priority of the attributed member. Higher numbers are prioritized, lower numbers are deprioritized. 0 is the default if no attribute is present.</param>
    public OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute(int priority)
    {
        Priority = priority;
    }

    /// <summary>
    /// The priority of the member.
    /// </summary>
    public int Priority { get; }
}

However, DynamycallyAccessedMembers or RequiresUnreferencedCode requires net6.0+.

So I was thinking of adding a preprocessor condition for these where needed.

Alternatively, you could drop support for netstandard, but not sure if you want that.

[jeffijoe]

Preprocessor condition sounds like the way to go.

I bet PolySharp can provide the attribute; feel free to add it if it does.

EDIT: Looks like PolySharp provides the other two as well, so a preprocessor directive wouldn't be required.