Take @targetName into account when resolving extension methods #16487
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
…ue classes Before target name we only matched on signatures. This was OK, since multiple extension methods of the same class must be different, otherwise we will get a "have the same erasure" error later at erasurePhase. But with @TargetNAME that's now a legal situation that needs to be resolve correctly. We do this by propagating the target name to the extension method and verifiying that the target names of the original and extension methods match. Fixes scala#16464
smarter
approved these changes
Dec 12, 2022
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Take @TargetNAME into account when resolving extension methods of value classes
Before target name we only matched on signatures. This was OK, since multiple extension methods of the same class must be different, otherwise we will get a "have the same erasure" error later at erasurePhase. But with @TargetNAME that's now a legal situation that needs to be resolved correctly. We do this by propagating the target name to the extension method and verifying that the target names of the original and extension methods match.
Fixes #16464