diff options
| author | Aleksandar Prokopec <axel22@gmail.com> | 2012-06-27 16:30:35 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Aleksandar Prokopec <axel22@gmail.com> | 2012-06-27 16:30:35 +0200 |
| commit | 5362f3df48a363308e41434b17fca60a0d4d84da (patch) | |
| tree | e493caacebcaf04f194ca52fa7c2033a6f47db55 /test/files/run/t3326.check | |
| parent | 9a28ee1ffc085bc680c48b12ad632b9133adf020 (diff) | |
| download | scala-5362f3df48a363308e41434b17fca60a0d4d84da.tar.gz scala-5362f3df48a363308e41434b17fca60a0d4d84da.tar.bz2 scala-5362f3df48a363308e41434b17fca60a0d4d84da.zip | |
Fix SI-3326.
The heart of the problem - we want to retain the ordering when
using `++` on sorted maps.
There are 2 `++` overloads - a generic one in traversables and
a map-specific one in `MapLike` - which knows about the ordering.
The problem here is that the expected return type for the expression
in which `++` appears drives the decision of the overload that needs
to be taken.
The `collection.SortedMap` does not have `++` overridden to return
`SortedMap`, but `immutable.Map` instead.
This is why `collection.SortedMap` used to resort to the generic
`TraversableLike.++` which knows nothing about the ordering.
To avoid `collection.SortedMap`s resort to the more generic `TraverableLike.++`,
we override the `MapLike.++` overload in `collection.SortedMap` to return
the proper type `SortedMap`.
Diffstat (limited to 'test/files/run/t3326.check')
| -rw-r--r-- | test/files/run/t3326.check | 8 |
1 files changed, 8 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/test/files/run/t3326.check b/test/files/run/t3326.check new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..d0e11cebf7 --- /dev/null +++ b/test/files/run/t3326.check @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ +Map(2 -> Hello, 1 -> World) +Map(5 -> Foo, 4 -> Bar) +Map(5 -> Foo, 4 -> Bar, 2 -> Hello, 1 -> World) +Map(3 -> ?, 2 -> Hello, 1 -> World) +Map(2 -> Hello, 1 -> World) +Map(5 -> Foo, 4 -> Bar) +Map(5 -> Foo, 4 -> Bar, 2 -> Hello, 1 -> World) +Map(3 -> ?, 2 -> Hello, 1 -> World)
\ No newline at end of file |