Skip to content

Conversation

@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky commented Dec 2, 2017

There was a discrepancy in that value parameters had a Deferred flag set
before pickling but not after unpickling. This triggered a check that the
(missing) rhs of an inline parameter was a constant. This commit changes
the condition of the test to also exclude parameters. It also aligns
frontend and unpickler in that the frontend will no longer mark term
parameters as Deferred.

@odersky odersky requested a review from nicolasstucki December 2, 2017 18:44
Copy link
Member

@dottybot dottybot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hello, and thank you for opening this PR! 🎉

All contributors have signed the CLA, thank you! ❤️

Commit Messages

We want to keep history, but for that to actually be useful we have
some rules on how to format our commit messages (relevant xkcd).

Please stick to these guidelines for commit messages:

  1. Separate subject from body with a blank line
  2. When fixing an issue, start your commit message with Fix #<ISSUE-NBR>:
  3. Limit the subject line to 72 characters
  4. Capitalize the subject line
  5. Do not end the subject line with a period
  6. Use the imperative mood in the subject line ("Added" instead of "Add")
  7. Wrap the body at 80 characters
  8. Use the body to explain what and why vs. how

adapted from https://chris.beams.io/posts/git-commit

Have an awesome day! ☀️

@smarter
Copy link
Member

smarter commented Dec 3, 2017

It also aligns frontend and unpickler in that the frontend will no longer mark term parameters as Deferred.

I don't see this change in this PR?

name match {
case OuterSelectName(_, levels) =>
writeByte(SELECTouter)
withLength {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Or why is the withLength needed here?

@allanrenucci
Copy link
Contributor

Merged as part of #3634

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.

5 participants