Improved stability of isDerivedFrom decisions
#1488
Merged
+110
−5
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
oxisto
force-pushed
the
improve-derived-from
branch
from
2b11c7d to
24e2694
Compare
KuechA
approved these changes
Apr 4, 2024
This PR adds the way `Type.isDerivedFrom` works. More concretly, we are once again taking the "wrap state" of the type into account. This means that pointer types and non-pointer types will not match even though their root types derive from each other. This was the way this function behaved in the past and it seems this was changed at some point, which led to some weird over-approximations in call resolving, basically ignoring wether a type was a pointer or not.
oxisto
force-pushed
the
improve-derived-from
branch
from
24e2694 to
4ef9cfd
Compare
|
oxisto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 4, 2024
This PR adds the way `Type.isDerivedFrom` works. More concretly, we are once again taking the "wrap state" of the type into account. This means that pointer types and non-pointer types will not match even though their root types derive from each other. This was the way this function behaved in the past and it seems this was changed at some point, which led to some weird over-approximations in call resolving, basically ignoring wether a type was a pointer or not.
maximiliankaul
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 18, 2024
This PR adds the way `Type.isDerivedFrom` works. More concretly, we are once again taking the "wrap state" of the type into account. This means that pointer types and non-pointer types will not match even though their root types derive from each other. This was the way this function behaved in the past and it seems this was changed at some point, which led to some weird over-approximations in call resolving, basically ignoring wether a type was a pointer or not.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR adds the way
Type.isDerivedFromworks. More concretly, we are once again taking the "wrap state" of the type into account. This means that pointer types and non-pointer types will not match even though their root types derive from each other. This was the way this function behaved in the past and it seems this was changed at some point.This behaviour seems to be less-error prone because it led to some weird over-approximations in call resolving, basically ignoring wether a type was a pointer or not. To replicate the behaviour previous to the PR, you can use
type.root.isDerivedFrom(other.root), if you really want to just match the root types.