Always fully define the types of lifted expressions #823
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
|
@odersky : I tried adding a config option to check that |
smarter
force-pushed
the
fix/lifting-and-inference
branch
from
6499e1e to
78488cb
Compare
smarter
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 19, 2015
Always fully define the types of lifted expressions
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fixes #822
Review by @odersky . I don't know if fixing this just in
EtaExpression#liftis the correct thing to do, we could still accidentally create symbols with non-fully defined types. Should we instead callfullyDefinedType(info)insideSymbols#newSymbol?