Fix #2088: Test for simple cycle in type aliases #2461
Conversation
| val aliasUpperBound = sym.info.bounds.hi | ||
| aliasUpperBound match { | ||
| case aliasUpperBound: RefinedType if aliasUpperBound.refinedInfo == tp => | ||
| ctx.error("illegal cyclic reference involving " + sym + " and " + aliasUpperBound.refinedName, sym.pos) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Even if this happens to explode in VarianceChecker right now, this isn't specific to VarianceChecker in any way. I would expect this to be checked in CheckNonCyclicMap
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It can be done in CheckNonCyclicMap.
nicolasstucki
force-pushed
the
fix-#2088
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d57f6 to
ec1e057
Compare
| case prefix: NamedType => !prefix.symbol.isStaticOwner && isInteresting(prefix.prefix) | ||
| case prefix: NamedType => | ||
| !prefix.symbol.isStaticOwner && | ||
| (pre.derivesFrom(sym.owner) || isInteresting(prefix.prefix)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should this be prefix.derivesFrom ? In any case could you explain why this is the correct thing to check?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this case we are asking if the prefix Foo.A is interesting. It is as Foo extends Base (where A is defined).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be able to reduce the false positives by checking if sym if not protected or private. I will add that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, it should be prefix.derivesFrom not pre.derivesFrom
No description provided.