Remove redundant mapOver in fixThisTypeModuleClassReferences#25440
Open
eejbyfeldt wants to merge 1 commit intoscala:mainfrom
Open
Remove redundant mapOver in fixThisTypeModuleClassReferences#25440eejbyfeldt wants to merge 1 commit intoscala:mainfrom
eejbyfeldt wants to merge 1 commit intoscala:mainfrom
Conversation
We should only have mapOver in the default branch or on the returned type not both as that redundant and causes exponential growth in compilation time. fixes: scala#25362
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
We should only have mapOver in the default branch or on the returned
type not both as that redundant and causes exponential growth in
compilation time.
fixes: #25362
How much have your relied on LLM-based tools in this contribution?
An LLM did point out the extra mapOver something that was missed when I skimmed the code. And also obviously by the reviewers of #23792. Not sure which place for the mapOver is preferred but having both patterns in the code base probably increases the risk of this pattern landing in the codebase.
How was the solution tested?
Existing and new compilation tests.
Additional notes