Tree tm #153
Closed
Tree tm #153
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
@odersky Dont you mind continuing with my version? I've got a lot of codebase(pattern mather and tailrec) that already is based on my implementation. |
Incorporated commits from scala#144. The logic here is very similar, modulo some minor organization and naming changes. The only deeper difference concerns retypeSelect, which here makes use of derivedSelect without changing kinds of tree nodes.
|
But it's fundamentally the same version! What difference does it make whether you take one or the other? |
|
As I wrote in my comment to #153 I am OK with merging either PR (144/153) into the other one. |
WojciechMazur
pushed a commit
to WojciechMazur/dotty
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2025
Backport "Make sure symbols in annotation trees are fresh before pickling" to 3.3 LTS
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Review by @DarkDimius. I had independently done something very similar to #144, based on the commits in there. So it was easiest to just continue that way and push it. It's logically almost the same as #144, with the exception of the retypeSelect treatment.