|
|
test case t0273. Was positive in Scala 2, is now deemed to be negative.
Two two definitions
def a = () => ()
def a[T] = (p:A) => ()
do have matching signatures, so should constitute a double definition.
I previously thought that we can get away if the two definitions have
different result types, but then you immediately have a problem because
the denotations have matching signatures for the pruposes of "&" yet
cannot be merged. Which of the two definitions would override
a definition in a base class is then an arbitrary decision.
|
