Fixes issue of missing type annotations on explicit returns. #5575
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
esdrubal
added
bug
esdrubal
force-pushed
the
esdrubal/5518_return
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cfe8503
to
9df4fef
Compare
Explicit returns did not have any type annotation causing the method disambiguation to fail. The solution was to add a new field to the `TypeCheckContext` called `function_type_annotation`. This field is initialized only in the type_check of function declarations. The field is used to set the type_annotation one while doing the type check of explicit return expressions. With this change `TypeCheckUnification` was also simplified as the unification is now done with `function_type_annotation`. The result was a few functions that are no longer required to be removed. Closes #5518
|
Really great, this cleans up a lot of code. I think we need a new test for the case reported in #5518 though, right? |
You are right, I forgot to add it to git. Pushed the test just now. |
jjcnn
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2024
tritao
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
test/src/e2e_vm_tests/test_programs/should_fail/return_in_strange_positions/test.toml
Show resolved
Hide resolved
tritao
approved these changes
Feb 8, 2024
sdankel
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 8, 2024
## Description Explicit returns did not have any type annotation causing the method disambiguation to fail. The solution was to add a new field to the `TypeCheckContext` called `function_type_annotation`. This field is initialized only in the type_check of function declarations. The field is used to set the type_annotation one while doing the type check of explicit return expressions. With this change `TypeCheckUnification` was also simplified as the unification is now done with `function_type_annotation`. The result was a few functions that are no longer required to be removed. Closes #5518 ## Checklist - [x] I have linked to any relevant issues. - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas. - [ ] I have updated the documentation where relevant (API docs, the reference, and the Sway book). - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works. - [x] I have added (or requested a maintainer to add) the necessary `Breaking*` or `New Feature` labels where relevant. - [x] I have done my best to ensure that my PR adheres to [the Fuel Labs Code Review Standards](https://github.com/FuelLabs/rfcs/blob/master/text/code-standards/external-contributors.md). - [x] I have requested a review from the relevant team or maintainers. --------- Co-authored-by: João Matos <[email protected]>
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.
Description
Explicit returns did not have any type annotation causing the method disambiguation to fail.
The solution was to add a new field to the
TypeCheckContextcalledfunction_type_annotation. This field is initialized only in the type_check of function declarations. The field is used to set the type_annotation one while doing the type check of explicit return expressions.With this change
TypeCheckUnificationwas also simplified as the unification is now done withfunction_type_annotation. The result was a few functions that are no longer required to be removed.Closes #5518
Checklist
Breaking*orNew Featurelabels where relevant.