Skip to content

Type Parameters in completions from implicit conversions not reducing properly #14687

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

Closed
rochala opened this issue Mar 15, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #15061
Closed

Type Parameters in completions from implicit conversions not reducing properly #14687

rochala opened this issue Mar 15, 2022 · 4 comments · Fixed by #15061
Assignees

Comments

@rochala
Copy link
Contributor

rochala commented Mar 15, 2022

Compiler version

3.1.1

Minimized code

Completion SingleDenotation for snippet below is not reduced properly. It happens when we try to fire completion on implicitly converted type to other, higher kinded type.
Unluckily I don't know if you can check signatures in repl, so we must create snippet.

import scala.language.implicitConversions
implicit def intToOption(f: Int): Option[Int] = Some(f)

1.ma

and now hit completion on 1.ma.

Output

Map method has signature of [A](f: A => B): Option[B]

Expectation

It should be properly reduced to [B](f: Int => B): Option[B]

@rochala rochala added itype:bug stat:needs triage Every issue needs to have an "area" and "itype" label labels Mar 15, 2022
@prolativ prolativ added area:ide and removed stat:needs triage Every issue needs to have an "area" and "itype" label labels Mar 15, 2022
@prolativ prolativ changed the title Implicit conversions Type Parameter not reducing properly Type Parameters in completions from implicit conversions not reducing properly Mar 15, 2022
@prolativ
Copy link
Contributor

When #14689 gets fixed we should make sure the intersection of these two issues also gets handled properly

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Mar 19, 2022

To whom should we assign ide-related issues like these?

@prolativ prolativ self-assigned this Mar 21, 2022
@prolativ
Copy link
Contributor

I guess currently I'm the one with most experience in this area

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Mar 21, 2022

OK, you got them. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants