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

Typechecking is not idempotent #5464

Open
scabug opened this issue Feb 14, 2012 · 4 comments
Open

Typechecking is not idempotent #5464

scabug opened this issue Feb 14, 2012 · 4 comments

Comments

@scabug
Copy link

scabug commented Feb 14, 2012

Apparently, under certain circumstances one cannot typecheck a tree twice, i.e.: 1) typecheck a tree, 2) reset all attrs, 3) typecheck the tree again. This is an umbrella issue that links to its particular cases submitted as separate issues. Some discussion about the matter at hand can be found here: http://groups.google.com/group/scala-internals/browse_thread/thread/29972d91a95e5b6d.

In 2.10 this issue won't be just theoretical. With the advent of reification and reflective compilation, it's crucial to have a possibility to take trees from the middle of the compilation pipeline, dehydrate them and store them for the future use.

@scabug
Copy link
Author

scabug commented Feb 14, 2012

Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-5464?orig=1
Reporter: @xeno-by
Affected Versions: 2.10.0, 2.11.0
Blocks #5748

@scabug
Copy link
Author

scabug commented Dec 6, 2012

@xeno-by said:
See tests introduced in scala/scala@5028181

@Atry
Copy link

Atry commented Jul 2, 2017

Will this be resolved in 2.13.0-RC1 ?

I cannot image how can this be resolved without Dotty's immutable AST.

@SethTisue SethTisue removed the blocker label Jul 19, 2017
@SethTisue SethTisue modified the milestones: 2.13.0-RC1, Backlog Mar 3, 2018
@SethTisue
Copy link
Member

consolidating these tickets here:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants