Fix #1716: Don't allow wildcards as type arguments to methods #1860
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Wildcards don't make sense as type arguments to methods, and I believe to keep things simple this should also apply to method type arguments in patterns. The best way to enforce this is to make use of the existing infrastructure in the parser for topLevelTypes.
liufengyun
reviewed
Dec 25, 2016
| @@ -0,0 +1,9 @@ | |||
| object Fail { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems a slip here: move the test from tests/pending/neg to tests/neg
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Wildcards don't make sense as type arguments to methods, and I believe to keep things
simple this should also apply to method type arguments in patterns.
The best way to enforce this is to make use of the existing infrastructure in the parser
for topLevelTypes.
This is an alternate fix for #1716 more in line with the way we exclude wildcards in types already.
Review by @liufengyun ?