|
|
PolyType-s parameterized by higher order type parameters (HOTPs)
should only be relatable with <:< or =:= if the variances of their
type parameters line up. This is only enforced for HOTPs defined in
method type arguments.
Invariant type parameters subsume variant ones. Concretely, as
described by @S11001001:
> A method taking [F[_]] can implement a method taking [F[+_]].
> Likewise, a method taking [F[_[+_]]] can implement a method
> taking [F[_[_]]], as with [F[_[_[_]]]] implementing [F[_[_[+_]]]],
> and so on, the variance subsumption flipping at each step.
>
> This is just the opposite of the variance for passing type
> parameters to either instantiate types or call methods; a F[+_]
> is a suitable F[_]-argument, a F[_[_]] a suitable F[_[+_]]-argument,
> and so on.
>
> All of the above rules can be duplicated for contravariant positions
> by substituting - for +. Also, something similar happens for
> weakening/strengthening bounds, I believe.
These cases are tested in the `// okay` lines in `neg/t2066.scala`.
|
