-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
fix: #23261 Distinguish 0.0 and -0.0 in ConstantType match types #23265
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
Open
kijuky
wants to merge
1
commit into
scala:main
Choose a base branch
from
kijuky:i23261
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+54
−1
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@ | ||
@main def main(): Unit = | ||
summon[0.0 =:= -0.0] // error: Cannot prove that (0.0: Double) =:= (-0.0: Double). | ||
val d: 0.0 = -0.0 // error: Cannot prove that (0.0: Double) =:= (-0.0: Double). | ||
val d2: -0.0 = 0.0 // error: Cannot prove that (-0.0: Double) =:= (0.0: Double). | ||
summon[0.0f =:= -0.0f] // error: Cannot prove that (0.0f: Float) =:= (-0.0f: Float). | ||
val f: 0.0f = -0.0f // error: Cannot prove that (0.0f: Float) =:= (-0.0f: Float). | ||
val f2: -0.0f = 0.0f // error: Cannot prove that (-0.0f: Float) =:= (0.0f: Float). |
This file contains hidden or 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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ | ||
type DoubleToString[D <: Double] <: String = D match | ||
case 0.0 => "0.0" | ||
case -0.0 => "-0.0" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
type DoubleToString2[D <: Double] <: String = D match | ||
case 0.0 => "0.0" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
type DoubleToString3[D <: Double] <: String = D match | ||
case -0.0 => "-0.0" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
type FloatToString[F <: Float] <: String = F match | ||
case 0.0f => "0.0f" | ||
case -0.0f => "-0.0f" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
type FloatToString2[F <: Float] <: String = F match | ||
case 0.0f => "0.0f" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
type FloatToString3[F <: Float] <: String = F match | ||
case -0.0f => "-0.0f" | ||
case _ => "_" | ||
|
||
@main def main(): Unit = { | ||
summon[0.0 =:= 0.0] | ||
summon[-0.0 =:= -0.0] | ||
summon[DoubleToString[0.0] =:= "0.0"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString[-0.0] =:= "-0.0"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString[3.14] =:= "_"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString2[0.0] =:= "0.0"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString2[-0.0] =:= "_"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString3[-0.0] =:= "-0.0"] | ||
summon[DoubleToString3[0.0] =:= "_"] | ||
summon[0.0f =:= 0.0f] | ||
summon[-0.0f =:= -0.0f] | ||
summon[FloatToString[0.0f] =:= "0.0f"] | ||
summon[FloatToString[-0.0f] =:= "-0.0f"] | ||
summon[FloatToString[3.14f] =:= "_"] | ||
summon[FloatToString2[0.0f] =:= "0.0f"] | ||
summon[FloatToString2[-0.0f] =:= "_"] | ||
summon[FloatToString3[-0.0f] =:= "-0.0f"] | ||
summon[FloatToString3[0.0f] =:= "_"] | ||
} |
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
MEMO
I tried to modify the Constants.scala below to change the processing of the
==
method, but it didn't work.scala3/compiler/src/dotty/tools/dotc/core/Constants.scala
Line 56 in a5a7644
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The line should use equals, which is already correct, see equalHashValue comment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sorry, second look says
Do not unwrap Constant to underlying value, use equals on Constant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The internal
tag
in Constant is already checked for equality. Thenrecur(v1.tpe, v2.tpe)
is not needed.However, what about
ClazzTag
whereConstant
wraps aType
?In general, the
equals
check is wrong. But if the underlying type is always some normalized class type, and it's comparing invariantClass[C]
, then the existingv1.value == v2.value
is correct (andv1 == v2
is also correct).