Skip to content

Conversation

@OlivierBlanvillain
Copy link
Contributor

The comment in Desugar.scala doesn't apply (anymore?), neg/t1843-variances.scala has a single error at the expected place.

The generated code for these annotations had a weird type ascription that, I believe, cannot be written in source. Therefore this also fixes #8649.

The comment in Desugar.scala doesn't apply (anymore?),
neg/t1843-variances.scala has a single error at the expected place.

The generated code for these annotations had a weird type ascription that,
I believe, cannot be written in source. Therefore this also fixes scala#8649.
@dwijnand
Copy link
Member

Looks like this change is a part of #11704. Did that PR fix #8649, then?

@OlivierBlanvillain
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like it, thanks for the pointer! I'll open a new PR to add the test.

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.

Match types seem to break case classes

2 participants