| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Performs the following renamings:
* scala.reflect.macros.BlackboxContext to scala.reflect.macros.blackbox.Context
* scala.reflect.macros.BlackboxMacro to scala.reflect.macros.blackbox.Macro
* scala.reflect.macros.WhiteboxContext to scala.reflect.macros.whitebox.Context
* scala.reflect.macros.WhiteboxMacro to scala.reflect.macros.whitebox.Macro
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/scala-internals/MX40-dM28rk
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This is the first commit in the series. This commit only:
1) Splits Context into BlackboxContext and WhiteboxContext
2) Splits Macro into BlackboxMacro and WhiteboxMacro
3) Introduces the isBundle property in the macro impl binding
Here we just teach the compiler that macros can now be blackbox and whitebox,
without actually imposing any restrictions on blackbox macros. These
restrictions will come in subsequent commits.
For description and documentation of the blackbox/whitebox separation
see the official macro guide at the scaladoc website:
http://docs.scala-lang.org/overviews/macros/blackbox-whitebox.html
Some infrastructure work to make evolving macros easier:
compile partest-extras with quick so they can use latest library/reflect/...
|
| | |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
As experience shows, these methods can easily be a source of confusion
for the newcomers: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-6696.
I'm only leaving the TypeTree(tp) factory, since the facility to
set underlying types for type trees is not exposed in the public API,
as it's inherently mutable.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
As the experience has shown, there's no need for a separate layer of reflection
in scala-library.jar. Therefore I'm putting an end to it.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The new name for AbsTypeTag was a matter of a lengthy discussion:
http://groups.google.com/group/scala-internals/browse_thread/thread/fb2007e61b505c4d
I couldn't decide until having fixed SI-6323 today, which is about
trying to reflect against a local class using typeOf.
The problem with local classes is that they aren't pickled, so their metadata
isn't preserved between Scala compilation runs. Sure, we can restore some of
that metadata with Java reflection, but you get the idea.
Before today typeOf of a local class created a free type, a synthetic symbol,
with a bunch of synthetic children that remember the metadata, effectively
creating a mini symbol table. That might be useful at time, but the problem is
that this free type cannot be reflected, because the global symbol table of
Scala reflection doesn't know about its mini symbol table.
And then it struck me. It's not the presence of abs types (type parameters and
abs type members) that differentiates arbitrary type tags from good type tags.
It's the presence of types that don't map well on the runtime world - ones that
can't be used to instantiate values, ones that can't be reflected.
So we just need a name for these types. Phantom types are compile-time only
concept, whereas our types can have partial correspondence with the runtime.
"Weak types" sound more or less okish, so let's try them out.
|
|
|
macroArgs now correctly calculates the argss in case when a macro def
has implicit parameters.
Macro impls can never have implicit parameters other than type tag evidences,
so tags will always come in a separate parameter list w.r.t other parameters
of macro impls (which are in 1-to-1 correspondence with the parameters of
macro defs).
Example 1:
def w/o implicits: (params1)...(paramsN)
impl w/o tags: (params1')...(paramsN')
Example 2:
def w/o implicits: (params1)...(paramsN)
impl w tags: (params1')...(paramsN')(implicit tags)
Example 3:
def w implicits: (params1)...(paramsN)(implicit paramsN+1)
impl w/o tags: (params1')...(paramsN')(paramsN+1')
Note: paramsN+1' is not an implicit parameter list
because impls cannot have implicit parameters other than tags
Example 4:
def w implicits: (params1)...(paramsN)(implicit paramsN+1)
impl w tags: (params1')...(paramsN')(paramsN+1')(implicit tags)
Therefore we don't need to merge the argss.last (that correspond to implicit
parameters of macro defs) with tags, as it was incorrectly coded before.
We just need to append tags to argss.
|
