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

Partial revert of #13780 #15341

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 31, 2022
Merged

Partial revert of #13780 #15341

merged 1 commit into from
May 31, 2022

Conversation

odersky
Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky commented May 31, 2022

#13780 caused several regressions and I think it is too restrictive as a fix.
I am reverting it and will be re-opening the original #11982 issue.

It would be good to get to the bottom of what the soundness problem hinted at
in #11982 is, and what a fix should be. As it stands #11982 is not obviously
a soundness problem but a separate compilation problem.

If the necessary fix is as restrictive as the one I reverted, we should wait until 3.2 to add it.

Fixes #15319

Also solves #15155 and reclassifies it as a pos test.

This is a more sweeping alternative of #15337. #15337 also fixes #15319 but leaves #15155 as an error.

@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ i9999.scala
13491.scala
7512.scala
i6505.scala
i15155.scala
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why adding this test to the blacklist? Isn't it supposed to pass after reverting the changes?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There are many matchtype tests that fail pickling. Someone should find and fix the cause. Previously the test was a neg test, so no pickling was attempted.

scala#13780 caused several regressions and I think it is too restrictive as a fix.
I am reverting it an re-opening the original scala#11982 issue.

It would be good to get to the bottom of what the soundness problem hinted at
in scala#11982 is, and what a fix should be. As it stands scala#11982 is not obviously
a soundness problem but a separate compilation problem.
@odersky odersky removed this from the 3.1.3 milestone May 31, 2022
@odersky odersky added the backport:nominated If we agree to backport this PR, replace this tag with "backport:accepted", otherwise delete it. label May 31, 2022
@odersky odersky merged commit e2efddc into scala:main May 31, 2022
@odersky odersky deleted the fix-15319-v2 branch May 31, 2022 18:16
@odersky odersky restored the fix-15319-v2 branch May 31, 2022 18:17
@Kordyjan Kordyjan added backport:done This PR was successfully backported. and removed backport:nominated If we agree to backport this PR, replace this tag with "backport:accepted", otherwise delete it. labels Jul 26, 2022
@Kordyjan Kordyjan added this to the 3.2.0 milestone Aug 1, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport:done This PR was successfully backported.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Cannot extract type from refinement in match type
4 participants