Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for edit-and-continue for tuples #12436

Closed
gafter opened this issue Jul 11, 2016 · 3 comments · Fixed by #19063
Closed

Add support for edit-and-continue for tuples #12436

gafter opened this issue Jul 11, 2016 · 3 comments · Fixed by #19063

Comments

@gafter
Copy link
Member

gafter commented Jul 11, 2016

The implementation of tuples (in particular, deconstruction) should support edit-and-continue.

@gafter
Copy link
Member Author

gafter commented Jul 11, 2016

/cc @jcouv @VSadov @jaredpar

@VSadov
Copy link
Member

VSadov commented Jul 11, 2016

Deconstruction is an expression and therefore most scenarios "should just work" since EnC is allowed only on statement level. The only potentially tricky scenario could be local declarations.

Supporting EnC for tuples in general could be a bigger problem though, because we need to reason about field names. - Is it a rude edit to change a field name of a tuple variable? (I am not sure...).

@gafter
Copy link
Member Author

gafter commented Jul 11, 2016

Because deconstruction involves the use of compiler-generated temporaries, and can call user-declared code such as conversion operators and Deconstruct (within which breakpoints can be set), edit-and-continue needs to track these temps and realign them during edits.

@gafter gafter added this to the 3.0 milestone Jul 17, 2016
@gafter gafter added this to Backlog in Compiler: Tuples Feb 20, 2017
@jcouv jcouv moved this from Backlog to Closed in Compiler: Tuples May 28, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
No open projects
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants