Skip to content
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

Fix problems with cycle checks #19453

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 16, 2024
Merged

Fix problems with cycle checks #19453

merged 2 commits into from
Jan 16, 2024

Conversation

odersky
Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky commented Jan 15, 2024

Several improvements:

  • Follow opaque aliases as if they were aliases. Otherwise we risk crashing in phases where the opaque is dropped and these become regular aliases.
  • Update the isInteresting test to follow more types. Previously the test was too strict so some cycles were missed.
  • Make -explain-cyclic also explain for cycles detected by this check.

Fixes #19372

Several improvements:

 - Follow opaque aliases as if they were aliases. Otherwise we
   risk crashing in phases where the `opaque` is dropped and these
   become regular aliases.
 - Update the `isInteresting` test to follow more types. Previously
   the test was too strict so some cycles were missed.
 - Make -explain-cyclic also explain for cycles detected by this check.

Fixes scala#19372
@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Jan 16, 2024

test performance please

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 0 running.

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

Performance test finished successfully:

Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/19453/ to see the changes.

Benchmarks is based on merging with main (31f837e)

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Jan 16, 2024

test performance please

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 0 running.

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

Performance test finished successfully:

Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/19453/ to see the changes.

Benchmarks is based on merging with main (31f837e)

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Jan 16, 2024

test performance please

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 0 running.

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

Performance test finished successfully:

Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/19453/ to see the changes.

Benchmarks is based on merging with main (31f837e)

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Jan 16, 2024

test performance please

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 1 running.

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor Author

odersky commented Jan 16, 2024

test performance please

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

performance test scheduled: 1 job(s) in queue, 1 running.

@dottybot
Copy link
Member

Performance test finished successfully:

Visit https://dotty-bench.epfl.ch/19453/ to see the changes.

Benchmarks is based on merging with main (2945fd1)

@smarter smarter merged commit 78c4da2 into scala:main Jan 16, 2024
19 checks passed
@smarter smarter deleted the fix-19372 branch January 16, 2024 20:43
@Kordyjan Kordyjan added this to the 3.4.1 milestone Feb 14, 2024
WojciechMazur added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2024
Backports #19453 to the LTS branch.

PR submitted by the release tooling.
[skip ci]
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.

Type recursion not detected in opaque types, leads to genBCode crash
4 participants