Unwrap substitutions both before _and_ after potential simplification #32116
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
reping @ahejlsberg ❤️ |
ahejlsberg
reviewed
Aug 19, 2019
weswigham
force-pushed
the
unwrap-substitutes-post-simplification
branch
from
1d13804 to
3b28100
Compare
|
@typescript-bot test this |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized community code test suite on this PR at e501cc9. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the extended test suite on this PR at e501cc9. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized Definitely Typed test suite on this PR at e501cc9. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
The user suite test run you requested has finished and failed. I've opened a PR with the baseline diff from master. |
src/compiler/checker.ts
Outdated
| if (target.flags & TypeFlags.Simplifiable) { | ||
| target = getSimplifiedType(target, /*writing*/ true); | ||
| while (true) { | ||
| const s = source.flags & TypeFlags.Substitution ? source = (<SubstitutionType>source).substitute : |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would it ever be worth updating substitute in-place to collapse multiple links down to one?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we can (or at least not usefully) - the associated typeVariable of nested SubstitutionTypes can (and most often does) differ. ie, a T substituted with T & U where U is substituted with U & string - while here we want to fully flatten, in other situations I think we want to keep the knowledge of what variables expanded to what. Multiple nested conditionals affecting the same type variable are already merged pre-substitute creation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right; I forgot that these are more like narrowings rather than unification substitutions.
|
@typescript-bot test this |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized community code test suite on this PR at 271187f. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized Definitely Typed test suite on this PR at 271187f. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the extended test suite on this PR at 271187f. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at 271187f. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. Update: The results are in! |
|
The user suite test run you requested has finished and failed. I've opened a PR with the baseline diff from master. |
|
@weswigham Here they are:Comparison Report - master..32116
System
Hosts
Scenarios
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@typescript-bot test this |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the extended test suite on this PR at a4fa025. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at a4fa025. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. Update: The results are in! |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized Definitely Typed test suite on this PR at a4fa025. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized community code test suite on this PR at a4fa025. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
The user suite test run you requested has finished and failed. I've opened a PR with the baseline diff from master. |
|
@weswigham Here they are:Comparison Report - master..32116
System
Hosts
Scenarios
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
@typescript-bot test this |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the extended test suite on this PR at 97efc37. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the perf test suite on this PR at 97efc37. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. Update: The results are in! |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized community code test suite on this PR at 97efc37. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
Heya @weswigham, I've started to run the parallelized Definitely Typed test suite on this PR at 97efc37. You can monitor the build here. It should now contribute to this PR's status checks. |
|
RWC is 👍 (no diff with |
|
@weswigham Here they are:Comparison Report - master..32116
System
Hosts
Scenarios
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ahejlsberg
approved these changes
Feb 26, 2020
src/compiler/checker.ts
Outdated
| const t = getNormalizedType(target, /*writing*/ true); | ||
| if (t === target) break; | ||
| target = t; | ||
| } while (true); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Put the loop inside getNormalizedType. It is only called from here.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #31804
The prophecized bug from when we added conditional simplification has come to pass, thus we must decide: Do we continue being naive and just apply a second unwrap step (as I have added here), or do we complicate the unwrapping/simplifying a bit more to guarantee that we always get the final maximally unwrapped/simplified type (as was originally in the conditional simplification PR).