Displaying type names in ComparingUnrelatedTypesInspection. #375
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
The message now says which types cannot be compared so that it's easier to find an error. ScalaInspectionTestBase methods that check if there are errors are slightly changed so that it is possible to test for errors with non-constant description.
|
I merged your fix manually with a couple of changes: 7f9428b |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The inspection description now says which types cannot be compared so that it's easier to find an error, especially when comparing two types with same name but different packages.
ScalaInspectionTestBase methods that check if there are errors are slightly changed so that it is possible to test for inspections with non-constant description.
It looks like in some cases from tests the type description looks a bit strange (
B.typewhen B is an object ora.typewhen comparing withisInstanceOf) but I believe it is still much better than not having types in descriptions at all.