Skip to content

Fix: Weird Case Class Compiler Error with Inline Function #12508 #14476

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

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

JakkuSakura
Copy link

Revert fix #11401 (proxy parameter should be owned by proxy) (since boundSym is new, no need to use check in QuoteUtils.changeOwner)

This reverts commit 0241150
This might help fix #12508

Seemingly fixes #12508, but I'm not sure what else it breaks. The new features are definitely missing

Proposed by

From: Nicolas Stucki <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 6:28 PM
Subject: Re: Building a tool on top of Dotty
To: Lionel Parreaux <[email protected]>
Cc: Martres Guillaume André Fradji <[email protected]>

A quick fix might be to revert 0241150 and publish it locally.

On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 at 02:47, Lionel Parreaux <[email protected]> wrote:

Salut Nico, (Cc Guillaume),

Un étudiant à moi essaie de construire une nouvelle approche pour spécialiser les programmes polymorphes, et on a décidé d'utiliser Dotty/Scala 3 comme base pour notre implémentation.

Malheureusement, on n'arrive pas à définir des classes polymorphes (crucial pour le projet) dans des macros à cause de Weird Case Class Compiler Error with Inline Function · Issue #12508 · lampepfl/dotty (github.com)
Donc on a essayé d'utiliser le Tasty Reader à la place, mais on se heurte maintenant à

Y a-t-il un moyen simple de contourner ces problèmes ? Ou une idée pour les résoudre directement dans le compilateur ?

Merci d'avance pour les conseils.

— LP

…since boundSym is new, no need to use check in QuoteUtils.changeOwner)"

This reverts commit 0241150
This might help fix scala#12508
@@ -1,16 +0,0 @@
package i11401
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This test should not be deleted

Copy link
Contributor

@nicolasstucki nicolasstucki left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This PR should introduce a tests for the feature being fixed

@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

Revering this introduces more bugs. In the email, it was proposed as a quick workaround.

@nicolasstucki nicolasstucki self-assigned this May 23, 2022
@ckipp01
Copy link
Member

ckipp01 commented May 10, 2023

@nicolasstucki I see you assigned yourself back to this. Is this something you still want to look into, or should we close? Maybe @qiujiangkun, you want to return to this?

@JakkuSakura
Copy link
Author

Sorry. I'm more busy than ever. Almost forgot about context

@ckipp01
Copy link
Member

ckipp01 commented May 10, 2023

Sorry. I'm more busy than ever. Almost forgot about context

No worries at all! It's been about a year of inactivity so I'll go ahead and close this. If either of you want to return to this, please do and reopen!

@ckipp01 ckipp01 closed this May 10, 2023
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.

Weird Case Class Compiler Error with Inline Function
3 participants