Skip to content

Try to avoid overconstraining when comparing and/or types #230

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 3 commits into from
Nov 18, 2014
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
63 changes: 61 additions & 2 deletions src/dotty/tools/dotc/core/TypeComparer.scala
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ class TypeComparer(initctx: Context) extends DotClass {
}
compareRefined
case OrType(tp21, tp22) =>
isSubType(tp1, tp21) || isSubType(tp1, tp22) || fourthTry(tp1, tp2)
eitherIsSubType(tp1, tp21, tp1, tp22) || fourthTry(tp1, tp2)
case tp2 @ MethodType(_, formals2) =>
def compareMethod = tp1 match {
case tp1 @ MethodType(_, formals1) =>
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -799,13 +799,52 @@ class TypeComparer(initctx: Context) extends DotClass {
finally pendingRefinedBases = saved
} || needsEtaLift(tp2, tp1) && tp2.testLifted(tp1.typeParams, isSubType(tp1, _))
case AndType(tp11, tp12) =>
isNewSubType(tp11, tp2) || isNewSubType(tp12, tp2)
eitherIsSubType(tp11, tp2, tp12, tp2)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should we have a "eitherIsNewSubType" or is that not necessary?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, the isNewSubType was a mistake. The test was not covered before, so isSubType is correct.

case JavaArrayType(elem1) =>
tp2 isRef ObjectClass
case _ =>
false
}

/** Returns true iff either `tp11 <:< tp21` or `tp12 <:< tp22`, trying at the same time
* to keep the constraint as wide as possible. Specifically, if
*
* tp11 <:< tp12 = true with post-constraint c1
* tp12 <:< tp22 = true with post-constraint c2
*
* and c1 subsumes c2, then c2 is kept as the post-constraint of the result,
* otherwise c1 is kept.
*
* This method is used to approximate a solution in one of the following cases
*
* T1 & T2 <:< T3
* T1 <:< T2 | T3
*
* In the first case (the second one is analogous), we have a choice whether we
* want to establish the subtyping judgement using
*
* T1 <:< T3 or T2 <:< T3
*
* as a precondition. Either precondition might constrain type variables.
* The purpose of this method is to pick the precondition that constrains less.
* The method is not complete, because sometimes there is no best solution. Example:
*
* A? & B? <: T
*
* Here, each precondition leads to a different constraint, and neither of
* the two post-constraints subsumes the other.
*/
def eitherIsSubType(tp11: Type, tp21: Type, tp12: Type, tp22: Type) = {
val preConstraint = constraint
isSubType(tp11, tp21) && {
val leftConstraint = constraint
constraint = preConstraint
if (isSubType(tp12, tp22) && !subsumes(leftConstraint, constraint, preConstraint))
constraint = leftConstraint
true
} || isSubType(tp12, tp22)
}

/** Like tp1 <:< tp2, but returns false immediately if we know that
* the case was covered previously during subtyping.
*/
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -1343,6 +1382,26 @@ class TypeComparer(initctx: Context) extends DotClass {
false
}

/** Constraint `c1` subsumes constraint `c2`, if under `c2` as constaint we have
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Typo: s/constaint/constraint

* for all poly params `p` defined in `c2` as `p >: L2 <: U2`:
*
* c1 defines p with bounds p >: L1 <: U1, and
* L2 <: L1, and
* U1 <: U2
*
* Both `c1` and `c2` are required to derive from constraint `pre`, possibly
* narrowing it with further bounds.
*/
def subsumes(c1: Constraint, c2: Constraint, pre: Constraint): Boolean =
if (c2 eq pre) true
else if (c1 eq pre) false
else {
val saved = constraint
try
c2.forallParams(p => c1.contains(p) && isSubType(c1.bounds(p), c2.bounds(p)))
finally constraint = saved
}

/** A new type comparer of the same type as this one, using the given context. */
def copyIn(ctx: Context) = new TypeComparer(ctx)

Expand Down
12 changes: 0 additions & 12 deletions tests/pending/pos/subtyping.scala

This file was deleted.

20 changes: 15 additions & 5 deletions tests/pos/subtyping.scala
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,16 @@
class A {
def test1(): Unit = {
implicitly[this.type <:< this.type]
implicitly[this.type <:< A]
}
object test {

class B
class C
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why did you remove these tests?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These classes are unused, is that intentional?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

no


def tag1[T](x: T): String & T = ???
def tag2[T](x: T): T & String = ???

val x1: Int & String = tag1(0)
val x2: Int & String = tag2(0)
val x3: String & Int = tag1(0)
val x4: String & Int = tag2(0)

}