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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Consider rewriting Scalasig #242

Open
xeno-by opened this issue Oct 10, 2018 · 1 comment
Open

Consider rewriting Scalasig #242

xeno-by opened this issue Oct 10, 2018 · 1 comment
Labels
Scalasig

Comments

@xeno-by
Copy link
Contributor

xeno-by commented Oct 10, 2018 •
edited
Loading

In #241, Mjar (currently called "Scalasig") was merged into Rsc. As a result, it no longer has to take SemanticDB data structures as input.

For the sake of simplicity, Mjar is still using SemanticDB payloads assembled by the Semanticdb phase. However, it may make sense to remove the SemanticDB middleman and make Mjar work directly with Rsc internals. This may potentially improve performance and code quality.
@xeno-by xeno-by changed the title Consider rewriting Mjar Consider rewriting Scalasig Jan 28, 2019
@xeno-by
Copy link
Contributor Author

xeno-by commented Jan 28, 2019

Before attempt this, we'll need to revive Checkscalasig (#243). One of the most important checkers in our toolchain - Checkoutline - relies on SemanticDB, so if we remove SemanticDB from our hot path, our testing infrastructure will take a significant hit.

@wiwa wiwa mentioned this issue Jul 24, 2019
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Scalasig
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@xeno-by