Add examples to test partial eta-expansion #2
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
|
I think you meant to open that against http://github.com/lampepfl/dotty, not http://github.com/dotty-staging/dotty/ |
|
Ah, I see you wanted to merge this into an open PR, in that case I'll just give you access to the dotty-staging repo so you can push to the branch directly. |
|
Wow, thanks @smarter! |
Blaisorblade
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 15, 2018
gsps
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 30, 2018
#2 (Missed another widenSingleton in PatternMatcher)
smarter
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 16, 2019
When desugaring pattern matching code for expressions where the
matched value has type `Null` or `Nothing`, we used to generate code
that's type-incorrect.
Example:
```
val Some(x) = null
```
got desugared into
```
val x: Nothing =
matchResult1[Nothing]:
{
case val x1: Null @unchecked = null: Null @unchecked
if x1.ne(null) then
{
case val x: Nothing = x1.value.asInstanceOf[Nothing]
return[matchResult1] x: Nothing
}
else ()
return[matchResult1] throw new MatchError(x1)
}
```
There were two problems here:
1) `x1.ne(null)`
2) `x1.value`
In both cases, we're trying to invoke methods that don't exist for type
`Nothing` (and #2 doesn't exist for `Null`).
This commits changes the desugaring so that
1) is solved by adding an ascription, if needed: (x1: AnyRef).ne(null)
2) is added by generating throw-away but type-correct code that never
executes: `throw null`
tgodzik
pushed a commit
to tgodzik/dotty
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 8, 2019
…compiler-output Extract tasty from compiler output
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2019
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 17, 2019
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 18, 2019
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 29, 2019
bishabosha
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2023
Integrate the spec of union and intersection types.
smarter
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2023
Update docs canthrow.md remove bad type alias at line 70
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 18, 2023
`given ... with` or `given ... = new { ... }` kinds of definitions now follow
the old rules. This allows recursive `given...with` definitions as they are
found in protoQuill.
We still have the old check in a later phase against directly recursive methods.
Of the three loops in the original i15474 we now detect #2 and #3 with new new
restrictions. #1 slips through since it is a loop involving a `given...with` instance
of `Conversion`, but is caught later with the recursive method check.
Previously tests #1 and #3 were detected with the recursive methods check and #2 slipped
through altogether.
The new rules are enough for defining simple givens with `=` without fear of looping.
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 18, 2023
`given ... with` or `given ... = new { ... }` kinds of definitions now follow
the old rules. This allows recursive `given...with` definitions as they are
found in protoQuill.
We still have the old check in a later phase against directly recursive methods.
Of the three loops in the original i15474 we now detect #2 and #3 with new new
restrictions. #1 slips through since it is a loop involving a `given...with` instance
of `Conversion`, but is caught later with the recursive method check.
Previously tests #1 and #3 were detected with the recursive methods check and #2 slipped
through altogether.
The new rules are enough for defining simple givens with `=` without fear of looping.
odersky
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 6, 2024
`given ... with` or `given ... = new { ... }` kinds of definitions now follow
the old rules. This allows recursive `given...with` definitions as they are
found in protoQuill.
We still have the old check in a later phase against directly recursive methods.
Of the three loops in the original i15474 we now detect #2 and #3 with new new
restrictions. #1 slips through since it is a loop involving a `given...with` instance
of `Conversion`, but is caught later with the recursive method check.
Previously tests #1 and #3 were detected with the recursive methods check and #2 slipped
through altogether.
The new rules are enough for defining simple givens with `=` without fear of looping.
Kordyjan
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 23, 2024
`given ... with` or `given ... = new { ... }` kinds of definitions now follow
the old rules. This allows recursive `given...with` definitions as they are
found in protoQuill.
We still have the old check in a later phase against directly recursive methods.
Of the three loops in the original i15474 we now detect #2 and #3 with new new
restrictions. #1 slips through since it is a loop involving a `given...with` instance
of `Conversion`, but is caught later with the recursive method check.
Previously tests #1 and #3 were detected with the recursive methods check and #2 slipped
through altogether.
The new rules are enough for defining simple givens with `=` without fear of looping.
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.
Add more tests as suggested in scala#2235.