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
warn on implicit def without explicit result type #5265
Comments
Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-5265?orig=1 |
@adriaanm said: |
@retronym said: Instead, I think the problem here is that The presentation compiler has a more robust namer to account for the sort of symptom, as caused by cancellation. I've moved that in to the regular namer in this WIP branch. https://github.com/retronym/scala/tree/ticket/5265 That said, I definetely agree we should also have a warning / migration for unannotated implicits. |
@retronym said: // t4716.scala
trait Bug2[ +A] extends TraversableOnce[A] {
def ++[B >: A](that: TraversableOnce[B]) = {
lazy val it = that.toIterator
it
}
} I'm going to park this ticket again. |
This'd be a great project for somebody. It has increased significance lately given that Scala 3 requires the explicit result type:
So I would say that Is there a volunteer who would like to tackle it? |
To whoever would like to take this on, note that the warning should not apply to local definitions, i.e., those for which |
Possible typo for Som, homebody. Or is that a portmanteau? |
Possible noise reduction if it accepted
The first form, in particular, adds information. The second could be transposed. The current exemption is for override in Scala 3/-Xsource:3. |
The following code snipet : https://gist.github.com/1427587
does not compile.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: