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

Tweak convertible implicits fix #18727

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 13, 2023

Conversation

dwijnand
Copy link
Member

@dwijnand dwijnand commented Oct 19, 2023

Rather than widen in viewExists, widen earlier, past type lambda
parameters. This allows foo2 in i16453b2 from being listed as a
possible implicit, as appropriate.

Tweaks my fix in #18719.

@dwijnand dwijnand force-pushed the tweak-convertible-implicits-fix branch 2 times, most recently from 1972cac to 731ec42 Compare October 19, 2023 14:05
Rather than widen in viewExists, widen earlier, past type lambda
parameters.  This allows `foo2` in `i16453b2` from being listed as a
possible implicit, as appropriate.
@dwijnand dwijnand force-pushed the tweak-convertible-implicits-fix branch from 731ec42 to a175525 Compare October 20, 2023 07:52
@dwijnand dwijnand marked this pull request as ready for review October 20, 2023 14:00
@dwijnand dwijnand assigned odersky and unassigned dwijnand Oct 20, 2023
@dwijnand dwijnand requested a review from odersky October 20, 2023 14:00
@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Nov 13, 2023

Should that not be "widen later" instead of "widen earlier"?

Otherwise LGTM

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member Author

Well, my previous fix added a widen inside viewExists and now I'm widening before calling viewExists.

@dwijnand dwijnand merged commit 85908de into scala:main Nov 13, 2023
18 checks passed
@dwijnand dwijnand deleted the tweak-convertible-implicits-fix branch November 13, 2023 20:43
odersky added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2023
Using issue #18650 as the reference (but issue #18999 is another option)
building on the fix in PR #18719 (refined in PR #18727) as well as the
fix in PR #18760, I'm trying to make a more root change here by making
sure that message forcing only occurs with `hasErrors`/`errorsReported`
is true, so as to avoid assertion errors crashing the compiler.
@Kordyjan Kordyjan added this to the 3.4.0 milestone Dec 20, 2023
dwijnand pushed a commit to dwijnand/scala3 that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2024
Using issue scala#18650 as the reference (but issue scala#18999 is another option)
building on the fix in PR scala#18719 (refined in PR scala#18727) as well as the
fix in PR scala#18760, I'm trying to make a more root change here by making
sure that message forcing only occurs with `hasErrors`/`errorsReported`
is true, so as to avoid assertion errors crashing the compiler.

(cherry picked from commit 10f2c10)
dwijnand pushed a commit to dwijnand/scala3 that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2024
Using issue scala#18650 as the reference (but issue scala#18999 is another option)
building on the fix in PR scala#18719 (refined in PR scala#18727) as well as the
fix in PR scala#18760, I'm trying to make a more root change here by making
sure that message forcing only occurs with `hasErrors`/`errorsReported`
is true, so as to avoid assertion errors crashing the compiler.

(cherry picked from commit 10f2c10)
WojciechMazur added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 23, 2024
Backports #18727 to the LTS branch.

PR submitted by the release tooling.
[skip ci]
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants