Fix #2000: Make implicit and non-implicit functions incomparable #2014
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
… with <:< Implicit and non-implicit functions are incomparable with <:<, but are treated as equivalent with `matches`. This means implicit and non-implicit functions of the same types override each other, but RefChecks will give an error because their types are not subtypes. Also contains a test for scala#2002.
|
The test failures are that i2002.scala still runs with -Yno-double-defs even though it should not, and locally it does not. Something seems to be wrong with the argument passing scheme under CI. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Implicit and non-implicit functions are incomparable with <:<, but are
treated as equivalent with
matches. This means implicit and non-implicitfunctions of the same types override each other, but RefChecks will
give an error because their types are not subtypes.
Also contains a test for #2002.