Fix #2631: Add custom error message #3802
Conversation
|
@biboudis do not forget this one |
| } | ||
| else if (name.toTermName == nme.ERROR) | ||
| UnspecifiedErrorType | ||
| else if (ctx.owner.isConstructor && ctx.owner.owner.unforcedDecls.toList.exists(_.name == tree.name)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would factor out the second test into a def. It is not clear what it does. Maybe:
def isNotAccesibleFromConstructor(name: Name) = {
val classMembers = ctx.owner.owner.unforcedDecls
classMembers.lookup.(name).exists
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the test is factored out it is not sufficient to ensure that it is not accessible from the constructor.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will use the .lookup.(name).exists though.
nicolasstucki
force-pushed
the
fix-#2631
branch
from
7c486df to
d83d09d
Compare
| else if (ctx.owner.isConstructor && ctx.owner.owner.unforcedDecls.lookup(tree.name).exists) { | ||
| // If the field existed but was not found we assume that | ||
| // we where in the context of an argument of the super constructor | ||
| errorType(ex"$tree is not accessible from super constructor arguments", tree.pos) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@smarter do you think this condition is enough?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't you check ctx.mode.is(InSuperCall) ? (The name is misleading, it's set for both this- and super-call, see the method superOrThisCallContext)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Also, don't say "super constructor", a this call is not a super call, it's just a constructor call
| else if (name.toTermName == nme.ERROR) | ||
| UnspecifiedErrorType | ||
| else | ||
| else if (ctx.owner.isConstructor && ctx.mode.is(Mode.InSuperCall) && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Doesn't ctx.mode.is(Mode.InSuperCall) implies ctx.owner.isConstructor?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It might be a method super call with super.xys.
4 participants
No description provided.