Skip to content

Fix #7781: Avoid using nested package definition #7784

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Dec 18, 2019

Conversation

nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

@nicolasstucki nicolasstucki commented Dec 16, 2019

Had to remove sealed from Expr and Type

Had to remove `sealed` from `Expr`
Now that Expr and Type are not sealed these do not need to be in the library
@nicolasstucki nicolasstucki requested review from anatoliykmetyuk and liufengyun and removed request for anatoliykmetyuk December 16, 2019 18:40
@nicolasstucki nicolasstucki marked this pull request as ready for review December 16, 2019 18:41
@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Dec 16, 2019

I think I have an alternative fix for that

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Dec 16, 2019

With #7786 this change should be no longer necessary.

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Dec 18, 2019

Reopened since we won't go ahead with #7786.

@odersky odersky added this to the 0.21 Tech Preview milestone Dec 18, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@liufengyun liufengyun left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@@ -0,0 +1 @@
2: Pattern Match Exhaustivity: _: Expr[Int]
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is interesting, we don't have the warning before. I'll have a look at it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It made sense because Expr is not sealed anymore. The test case was clearly not exhaustive.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder why the error was not there before

@odersky odersky merged commit 8d2ee65 into scala:master Dec 18, 2019
@odersky odersky deleted the fix-#7781 branch December 18, 2019 10:15
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants