| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines |
|---|
| |
|
|
|
| |
The name looks weird in the scaladoc overview panel,
so I decided to do a last-minute rename.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
This brings all the files into line with the .gitattributes
settings, which should henceforth be automatically maintained
by git.
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
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.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This works around the issue of the inability to use classOf for top-level object classes by inventing a new
anonymous class and instantiating it just to grab its class. Since the class is a nested type of the
top-level object it'll be in the same classloader unless some kind of evil behavior is afoot.
This patch should be undone if ever SI-2453 ever gets fixed, or we wind up with a direct way to grab
the class of an object.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Instead of trying to serialize the entire universe and failing miserably
(which happens now), exprs and type tags will now serialize their creators
and deserialize into scala.reflect.basis.
Since creators produced by reification are not serializable right now,
serialization will crash. That's a small improvement over state of the art
functionality-wise, but it's a step forward robustness-wise.
Next step in this direction is generation of serialization code for creators.
Related issues: SI-5919 and SI-5908. Also see the discussion at scala-internals
http://groups.google.com/group/scala-internals/browse_thread/thread/ef63f8b5bd194c7c
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
This renaming arguably makes the intent of `asType` more clear,
but more importantly it shaves 6 symbols off pervasive casts that
are required to anything meaningful with reflection API
(as in mirror.reflectMethod(tpe.member(newTermName("x")).asMethodSymbol)).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
After a discussion on a reflection meeting on Jul 17
we concluded that we should split staticModule into
staticModule and staticPackage to remove the ambiguity
between packageless objects and packageless packages
(more in the comments in the body of the commit).
The motivation is verbosely outlined in the comments,
but the bottom line is that Scala allows packages and
packageless objects to have the same name within the same program.
Therefore at times we need to disambiguate, hence the introduction
of the staticPackage method.
As of such staticModule no longer works for packages.
In the same fashion staticPackage doesn't work for modules.
This is done to ensure robustness of reification.
I would like to do the same for getModule in Definitions,
but we have to maintain backward compatibility. That's why I retained
the old behavior, but replaced getModule invocations with getPackage
where appropriate to be in line with staticModule and staticPackage.
Another important thing that follows from the discussion is that
both staticClass and staticModule prefer parent packages over parent objects
in cases of ambiguity. Say, if we have the following snippet of code:
object B { class C } next to package B { class C }
then staticClass("B.C") will never even consider a C inside the object B.
This is how scalac operates, so we decided to be consistent here.
Finally reification logic got changed to distinguish between
staticModule and staticPackage, and to allow for the fact that
staticClass and staticModule prefer parent packages to parent objects.
|
| | |
|
|
|
* introduces ArrayTag and ErasureTag
* all type tags now feature erasure
|
