Skip to content

Fix #5386: Normalize unary operator expressions #5479

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 4 commits into from
Nov 21, 2018

Conversation

odersky
Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky commented Nov 20, 2018

A unary operator expression pre.op where op is one of +, -, ~, !
that has a constant type ConstantType(v) but that is not a constant expression
(i.e. pre has side-effects) is translated to

{ pre; v }

This avoids the situation where we have a Select node which does not have a symbol.

A unary operator expression `pre.op` where `op` is one of `+`, `-`, `~`, `!`
that has a constant type `ConstantType(v)` but that is not a constant expression
(i.e. `pre` has side-effects) is translated to

    { pre; v }

This avoids the situation where we have a Select node which does not have a symbol.
@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Nov 20, 2018

Derived from biboudis:fix-#5386. Note: Always do PRs from staging then others can work on them.

if (isIdempotentExpr(tree1)) Literal(value)
else tree1 match {
case Select(qual, _) if tree1.tpe.isInstanceOf[ConstantType] =>
// it's a unary operator; Simplify `pre.op` to `{ pre; v }` where `v` is the value of `pre.op`
Copy link
Member

@smarter smarter Nov 20, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If we lose op before pickling, then it'll be missing from the IDE in go-to-definition/find-all-references

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Also I don't really get what's special about unary operators here ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

They do not get a symbol. So nothing is lost when doing the transform.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but why do they not get a symbol ?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Because constant folding replaces the type with a ConstantType.

Add test showing that user-defined unary operators do not cause a problem,
even if they have constant types.
@odersky odersky merged commit d6e67d4 into scala:master Nov 21, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants