From 90a98f7c41cfcfdb60dc25db5ac33d0d0ff10f99 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jason Zaugg <jzaugg@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2014 18:29:35 +1000
Subject: SI-5639 Fix spurious discarding of implicit import

In Scala fa0cdc7b (just before 2.9.0), a regression in implicit
search, SI-2866, was discovered by Lift and fixed. The nature of
the regression was that an in-scope, non-implicit symbol failed to
shadow an eponymous implicit import.

The fix for this introduced `isQualifyingImplicit` which discards
in-scope implicits when the current `Context`'s scope contains
a name-clashing entry.

Incidentally, this proved to be a shallow solution, and we later
improved shadowing detection in SI-4270 / 9129cfe9. That picked
up cases where a locally defined symbol in an intervening scope
shadowed an implicit.

This commit includes the test case from the comments of SI-2866.
Part of it is tested as a neg test (to test reporting of ambiguities),
and the rest is tested in a run test (to test which implicits are
picked.)

However, in the test case of SI-5639, we see that the scope lookup
performend by `isQualifyingImplicit` is fooled by a "ghost" module
symbol. The apparition I'm referring to is entered when
`initializeFromClassPath` / `enterClassAndModule` encounters
a class file named 'Baz.class', and speculatively enters _both_ a
class and module symbol. AFAIK, this is done to defer parsing the
class file to determine what inside. If it happens to be a Java
compiled class, the module symbol is needed to house the static
members.

This commit adds a condition that `Symbol#exists` which shines a torch
(forces the info) in the direction of the ghost module symbol. In our
test, this causes it to vanish, as we only need a class symbol for
the Scala defined `class Baz`.

The existing `pos` test for this actually did not exercise the bug,
separate compilation is required. It was originally checked in to
`pending` with this error, and then later moved to `pos` when someone
noticed it was not failing.
---
 test/files/neg/t2866.scala | 59 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 test/files/neg/t2866.scala

(limited to 'test/files/neg/t2866.scala')

diff --git a/test/files/neg/t2866.scala b/test/files/neg/t2866.scala
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..55ebff9710
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/files/neg/t2866.scala
@@ -0,0 +1,59 @@
+// for 2.7.x compatibility
+
+object A {
+  implicit val one = 1
+}
+
+object Test {
+
+  locally {
+    import A._
+    locally {
+      // assert(implicitly[Int] == 1) // error: could not find implicit value for parameter e: Int.
+                                     // !!! Why one A.one?
+      // (I assume you mean: why _not_ A.one? A.one is shadowed by local one.
+      // but the local one cannot be used yet because it does not have an explicit type.
+      implicit val one = 2
+      assert(implicitly[Int] == 2)
+      assert(one == 2)
+    }
+  }
+
+  locally {
+    import A._
+    implicit val one: Int = 2
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 2)
+    assert(one == 2)
+  }
+
+  locally {
+    import A.one // warning: imported `one' is permanently hidden by definition of value one.
+                 // !!! Really?
+    //assert(implicitly[Int] == 1)
+    implicit val one = 2
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 2) // !!! why not 2?
+    assert(one == 2)
+  }
+
+  locally {
+    import A.one
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 1)
+    implicit val two = 2
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 2) // !!! Not ambiguous in 2.8.0. Ambigous in 2.7.6
+  }
+
+  locally {
+    import A._
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 1)
+    implicit val two = 2
+    import A.{one => _}
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 2) // !!! Not ambiguous in 2.8.0. Ambiguous in 2.7.6
+  }
+
+  locally {
+    import A.{one => _, _}
+    implicit val two = 2
+    assert(implicitly[Int] == 2) // not ambiguous in 2.8.0 nor im ambiguous in 2.7.6
+  }
+
+}
-- 
cgit v1.2.3