Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
Scalafix for migrating from 2.12 to 2.13 #327
Good question. I think these are fine because we just write their type as the corresponding singleton type without requiring further inference. This rule aims to avoid triggering inference during implicit search, which is thus always ok for objects. Will have to experiment a bit more to convince myself though :)
What's the deal with "implicit val/def without complete signature"? I have been recently following IntelliJ's advise to add return types for implicit vals, but this produces a quite unfortunate situation, illustrated by the following examples:
May I propose that a type annotation be not required if we call either
I think that would strike a good balance between still essentially documenting the type and avoiding Java'ish DRY horror.