cmd/compile: typeparams: should //go:nointerface methods satisfy type parameter constraints? #47045
The "fieldtrack" experiment includes a
What effect should
Fieldtracking is formally just an experiment, so I don't think it's urgent to support either way (i.e., either to accept and handle correctly if it's allowed, or to consistently reject if it's not allowed). I also think we reserve the right to change our mind on the right behavior here. But it seems worth making sure we're more-or-less on the same page about long-term direction here.
I'm currently inclined to think
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
…face This CL changes fixedbugs/issue30862.go into a "runindir" test so that it can use '-goexperiment fieldtrack' and test that //go:nointerface works with cmd/compile. In particular, this revealed that -G=3 and unified IR did not handle it correctly. This CL also fixes unified IR's support for //go:nointerface and adds a test that checks that //go:nointerface, promoted methods, and generics all interact as expected. Updates #47045. Change-Id: Ib8acff8ae18bf124520d00c98e8915699cba2abd Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/332611 Run-TryBot: Matthew Dempsky <email@example.com> TryBot-Result: Go Bot <firstname.lastname@example.org> Trust: Matthew Dempsky <email@example.com> Reviewed-by: Robert Griesemer <firstname.lastname@example.org>