Breaking change. And also ad-hoc I'd say. Why would the parent of the last member in the path would be so special? Taking into account the whole path, that would make a lot more sense to me. That would be a breaking change too :) But the whole idea seems kind of subtle and prone to misunderstandings. Not really about the code...

I presume Include in EF (kind of similar) works by considering the whole structural path.

Where are you seeing "last member in the path"? Both of the following set the parent for every item - unless I'm missing something.

                node.GetMemberExpressions()
                    .Select(e => new MapMemberInfo(e.Member, e.Expression.Type))

                foreach (var memberName in fullMemberName.Split('.'))
                {
                    var currentType = GetCurrentType(property, type);
                    property = currentType.GetFieldOrProperty(memberName);
                    yield return new MapMemberInfo(property, currentType);
                }

What would be your approach? (requested opinions earlier)

A breaking change would break existing tests - right? Or define breaking change.

You interpret the same parameters in a different way. Clearly some code will break. I guess the problem is that the member list is flattened, as opposed to a structural path.

Seems to me like it's working as before with exception of the "member belongs to a base class" scenario - which is the fix.

I don't see MemberInfo.ReflectedType being used anywhere else in the code.

The inheritance design is because we collect the member infos before the call to ExpressionBuilder.GetMapExpression - I think changing that interface would have been a bigger break.

It's ok to come up with a new design once you've had time to think about it - this can stay on hold. We know the underlying problem.

This pull request has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.