fix #9276: check valdef is realizable at pickler #11843
Conversation
|
this is probably a do not merge, I will repost this comment here: |
|
test performance please |
|
performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 0 running. |
| @@ -343,6 +343,11 @@ class TreePickler(pickler: TastyPickler) { | |||
| case _ if tpt.isType => pickleTpt(tpt) | |||
| } | |||
| pickleTreeUnlessEmpty(rhs) | |||
| mdef match | |||
| case _: ValDef if !sym.is(StableRealizable) => | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should probably check the tag instead
|
Performance test finished successfully: Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/11843/ to see the changes. Benchmarks is based on merging with master (75f7cb3) |
|
performance test failed: Please check http://contact.support/pull-11843-03-22-17.40.out for more information Edit: this is from the new machine, please ignore it. |
|
test performance please |
|
performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 0 running. |
|
The problem with this is: checking realizability is usually cheap but has unbounded complexity for lazy vals. We sort of rely on the fact that the intersection of (non-object) lazy vals and vals with type members (where we check stability) is usually small. But with this PR that consideration is now invalid; we will check realizability for every val, at possibly unbounded cost. So, that makes me nervous, even if our benchmarks don't show it. |
|
Performance test finished successfully: Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/11843/ to see the changes. Benchmarks is based on merging with master (4035f51) |
|
close in favor of #11858 |
fixes #9276