| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |\
| |
| | |
fix t5843
|
| | | |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | | |
Implemented functionality to invalidate classpath entries
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
incremental compiles.
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | | |
SI-5845 Advances the example from a crasher to an inference failure.
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
The inference failure itself seems like an instance of of SI-3346.
But dependent method types (which triggered the crash), can be employed
to avoid inferring the type constructor CC.
class Num[T] {
def mkOps = new Ops
class Ops { def +++(rhs: T) = () }
}
class A {
implicit def infixOps[T](lhs: T)(implicit num: Num[T]): num.Ops = num.mkOps
implicit val n1: Num[Int] = new Num[Int] { }
5 +++ 5
}
|
| |\ \ \ \
| |_|_|/
|/| | | |
fixes for exhaustivity
|
| | | | | |
|
| | |/ / |
|
| |\ \ \
| |/ /
|/| | |
Fix a NSDNHAO in extension methods.
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
A bridge method, created when we override a method from
a superclass and refine the return type, was appearing
as an overloaded alternative. (`erasure` doesn't create
new scopes, so the bridges it builds are visible at
earlier phases.)
The problem was masked when compiling with specialization,
which *does* create a new scope, shielding the code in
question from the artefacts of erasure.
To fix the problem, we filter out bridge methods from
the overloaded alternatives returned by `.decl`, as would
happen internally in `.member`.
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Who could have suspected it would actually be right most of the time?
|
| |/ /
| |
| |
| | |
...be a little less chatty.
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | | |
fix SI-5829: refinement typeref has a prefix
|
| | |/ |
|
| |\ \
| | |
| | | |
SI-5318 Make implicit divergence checking PolyType aware.
|
| | | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
Replaces the two active subclasses of `SymCollector` with
direct use of traversal methods of `Type`.
Wildcard free class type parameters, not just method type parameters,
when stripping the core type of candidate implicits. The spec doesn't
make any such distinction, and the enclosed test, t5318c, crashes
without this change.
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | | |
Cleaning up some code introduced for the old presentation compiler long ...
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
ago. Review by @dragos
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Closes SI-5821.
|
| | |/ / /
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
This was an interesting one. Basically an erroneous
import was creating an erroneous symbol for Array (similary
for other symbols that were 'found' in this import) which was
leading to all sorts of inconsistencies and spurious errors.
This wasn't a bug in ContextErrors but rather something that
existed for ages and was hidden from the general audience.
Review by @paulp.
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Fixes SI-5085 and SI-4833.
|
| | | |_|/
| |/| | |
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
we don't handle switches with guards, whereas the old patmat did
to ease the transition, let's not error out and see how we can resolve this
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Fixes SI-5805
|
| | |/ / / |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Fixes SI-5428.
|
| | |/ / / |
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Move implicit ExecutionContext to be determined by lexical scope
|
| | |/ / /
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Port of a pull request originally submitted by @havocp.
- declare the invariant that all app callbacks have an
associated ExecutionContext provided at the place
the callback is passed to a method on Future
- always run callbacks in their associated EC
- since all callbacks have their own EC, Promise
does not need one
- "internal" callbacks don't need to defer execution either
since we know the ultimate app callback will do so,
therefore we can use an immediate executor for these
|
| |/ / / |
|
| | | | |
|
| |\ \ \ |
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
We were getting away with this somehow, but the types are wrong after
typer and that sort of thing is noticed by more people now. I took the
opportunity to add our first -Ycheck:all test, which is at least as much
about helping -Ycheck:all remain in good working order as it is about
this test.
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| | | | | |
|
| |/ / /
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
* Moved ASM sources to src/asm
* New ant task builds asm *ONCE*. Build times improve by a few seconds
* Fixed SBT build for new asm location. SBT build still broken from actors-migration and partest
Review by @magarciaEPFL
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | | |
SI-3761: Overload resolution fails on by-name parameter
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Lukas noted the stopgap at methTypeArgs isn't needed. What! No black tie formals.
|
| | |/ /
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | | |
When isAsSpecific checks if method m applies to args of types of
formal params of m1, a by-name parameter was converted to its
underlying result type for the params (of m) but not the args (of m1).
This had the useful effect of making m(A) more specific than m(=>A),
which is the specified prioritization for implicit views,
but also made m(=>A) and m(=>A, B*) ambiguous. To handle this edge
case, the isCompatible test for A and =>A is made explicit, and
by-name params are no longer converted.
|
| |\ \ \
| | | |
| | | | |
Adding the Actor Migration Kit.
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Fixed behavior of the StashingActor in case of unhandeled message.
Fixed a typo in deprecated annotation.
Fixed comments.
Fixed copyright.
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
Kit consists of:
1) The StashingActor which adopts an interface similar to Akka.
2) Props mockup for creating Akka like code
3) Pattern mockup
4) Test cases for every step in the migration.
5) MigrationSystem which will paired on the Akka side.
Review of the code : @phaller
Review of the build: @jsuereth
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
virtpatmat: treemaker approximation refactorings and exhaustivity
|
| | | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | | |
We check exhaustivity by representing a match as a formula in
finite-domain propositional logic (FDPL) that is false when
the match may fail. The variables in the formula represent
tested trees in the match (type tests/value equality tests).
The approximation uses the same framework as the CSE analysis.
A matrix of tree makers is turned into a DAG, where sharing
represents the same value/type being tested.
We reduce FDPL to Boolean PL as follows.
For all assignments, V_i = c_i_j, we introduce a proposition
P_i_j that is true iff V_i is equal to the constant c_i_j,
for a given i, and all j, P_i_j are mutually exclusive
(a variable cannot have multiple values).
If the variable's domain is closed, we assert that one of P_i_j
must be true for each i and some j. The conjunction of these
propositions constitutes the equality axioms.
After going through negational normal form to conjunctive normal
form, we use a small SAT solver (the DPLL algorithm) to find
a model under which the equational axioms hold but the match fails.
The formula: EqAxioms /\ -MatchSucceeds.
Note that match failure expresses nicely in CNF: the
negation of each case (which yields a disjunction) is anded.
We then turn this model into variable assignments
(what's the variable (not) equal to, along with recursive
assignments for its fields). Valid assignments (no ill-typed
field assignments) are then presented to the user as counter examples.
A counter example is a value, a type test, a constructor call
or a wildcard. We prune the example set and only report the
most general examples. (Finally, we sort the output to yield stable,
i.e. testable, warning messages.)
A match is only checked for exhaustivity when the type of the
selector is "checkable" (has a sealed type or is a tuple
with at least one component of sealed type).
We consider statically known guard outcomes, but generally back
off (don't check exhaustivity) when a match has guards
or user-defined extractor calls. (Sometimes constant folding
lets us statically decide a guard.)
We ignore possibly failing null checks (which are performed
before calling extractors, for example), though this could
be done easily in the current framework. The problem is false
positives. People don't usually put nulls in tuples or lists.
To improve the exhaustivity checks, we rewrite `List()` to Nil.
TODO: more general rewrite of List(a, b, ..., z) to `a :: b :: ... :: z`.
When presenting counter examples, we represent lists in the
user-friendly List(a,...,z) format. (Similarly for tuples.)
There are no exhaustivity checks for a match-defined PartialFunction.
misc notes:
- fix pure case of dpll solver
impure set (symbol that occurs both as a positive and negative literal)
was always empty since I was looking for literals (which are not equal if positivity is not equal)
but should have been looking for symbols
- FDPL -> BoolPL translation collects all syms in props
since propForEqualsTo generates an Or, must traverse the prop
rather than assuming only top-level Syms are relevant...
also, propForEqualsTo will not assume Or'ing a whole domain is equivalent to True
(which it isn't, since the type test may fail in general)
- improve counter example description
- treat as constructor call when we either have definite type information about a real class,
or we have no equality information at all, but the variable's type is a class
and we gathered constraints about its fields (typically when selector is a tuple)
- flatten a :: b :: ... :: Nil to List(a, b, ...)
- don't print tuple constructor names, so instead of "Tuple2(a, b)", say "(a, b)"
- filter out more statically impossible subtypes
the static types convey more information than is actually checkable at run time
this is good, as it allows us to narrow down the subtypes of a sealed type,
however, when modeling the corresponding run-time checks we need to "erase" the
uncheckable parts (using existentials so that the types are still well-kinded),
so that we can use static subtyping as a sound model for dynamic type checks
- experimental java enum handling seals enum class
before, we created a refinement class as the placeholder for the sealed children
it seems more direct to use the enum class for that
this way, the new pattern matcher's exhaustiveness checker just works for java enums
|
| | | |/ /
| |/| |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | | |
- TypeTestTreeMaker subsumes the old TypeTestTM and TypeAndEqualityTM
its type- and equality-testing logic is configurable so that it can:
- generate trees (main purpose)
- check whether this tree maker is a pure type test
- generate the proposition that models this tree maker
(for exhaustivity and other analyses)
- [CSE] subst binders of dropped tm's to stored ones
somehow the refactoring broke the replacement of the binder of dropped
treemakers by the binder of the reused treemaker
when replacing
TM1(x1 => ...) >> TM2(x2 => ...) >> TM3(x3 => ...) >> ...
TM1'(x1' => ...) >> TM2'(x2' => ...) >> TM3(x3' => ...) >> ...
by
Memo1(x1 => ...) >> TM2(x2 => ...) >> Memo2(x3 => ...) >> ...
Reuse(Memo2)...
you need to replace x1' and x2' by x1
since TM2 tested a shared condition but was not memo-ised,
that implies it simply passed x1 through to x3 unmodified,
and x2' can simply use the stored x1
- type of first uniqued binder sets type of tree
when approximating a tree of treemakers as a DAG,
where sharing indicates the same value is tested,
use the type of the binder that was first used to
create a unique tree as the type of that tree,
and thus all trees used for the same binder in the future
- track substitution of alternatives when approximating
- error on unswitchable @switch annotated matches
if we can't turn a match (with more than two cases) into a switch,
but the user insists, emit an error
misc notes:
- when all you need is nextBinder, FunTreeMaker is your guy
- must pass flag to TypeTestTM for extractorarg test
case TypeTestTreeMaker(prevBinder, testedBinder, expectedTp, nextBinderTp)
(prevBinder eq testedBinder) does not imply it's a pure type test for an extractor call
note that the expected type for an extractor argument is not a type pattern,
thus we only do a classic type test -- the idea was to detect that case by noticing we're
being called with the same previous and tested binder, but that case also arises
for Typed patterns
|
| |\ \ \ \
| | | | |
| | | | | |
SI-5779: Wrong warning message (comparing Number)
|
