Erasure incorrectly rewrites isInstanceOf[X & Y] as isInstanceOf[X]

[smarter]

It should be rewritten as isInstanceOf[X] && isInstanceOf[Y] of course.
Test case that should run without asserting:

trait X
trait Y

object Test {
  def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = {
    val x: Any = new X {}
    assert(!x.isInstanceOf[X & Y])
  }
}

[DarkDimius]

AFAIK this should be handled in splitter.

…

On 12 March 2017 6:04:28 pm Guillaume Martres ***@***.***> wrote: It should be rewritten as `isInstanceOf[X] && isInstanceOf[Y]` of course. Test case that should run without asserting: ```scala trait X trait Y object Test { def main(args: Array[String]): Unit = { val x: Any = new X {} assert(!x.isInstanceOf[X & Y]) } } ``` -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: #2084

[smarter]

No, I think this should be handled by TypeTestCasts which already handles rewriting isInstanceOf[A | B]

[DarkDimius]

@smarter, I guess you're right. I remembered that there was a phase before easure that did it, so I've assumed that's splitter.
Apparently I was the one to roll it into erasure 2 years ago.

[DarkDimius]

Please don't spam "prio:high" this bug doesn't block anything and shouldn't have high priority.

[smarter]

1. I don't think I "spam" anything, besides this one, there are only two other open issues I've marked prio:high. I've been basically the only person triaging issues for the past few months, but I'll stop if it's not appreciated.
2. prio:high doesn't mean "blocker" to me, here's the classification I use:
   • high: This is important to fix soon and should not be forgotten.
   • low: It's okay to not fix it now, we'll get to it eventually.
   • medium: everything else.
   • If something was a blocker, I would use a "blocker" or "prio:critical" tag.
3. We can discuss the priority levels and their meaning at the next dotty meeting so that everyone agrees on them.

[felixmulder]

Let's do that, also - we should choose a person for triaging for meeting day + 1 month. Cheers, Felix

…

On Mon, Mar 13, 2017, 15:34 Guillaume Martres ***@***.***> wrote: 1. I don't think I "spam" anything, besides this one, there are only two other open issues I've marked prio:high. I've been basically the only person triaging issues for the past few months, but I'll stop if it's not appreciated. 2. prio:high doesn't mean "blocker" to me, here's the classification I use: - high: This is important to fix soon and should not be forgotten. - low: It's okay to not fix it now, we'll get to it eventually. - medium: everything else. - If something was a blocker, I would use a "blocker" or "prio:critical" tag. 3. We can discuss the priority levels and their meaning at the next dotty meeting so that everyone agrees on them. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2084 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABdYwT9JQnUwOG-lnxsvxrjBlFGDueoMks5rlVQDgaJpZM4MamVO> .