Bugfix: Make 'static member val' possible in a type without any constructor at all #16331
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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 fixes #16297
Before, it was failing with
'member val' definitions are only permitted in types with a primary constructor. Consider adding arguments to your type definition, e.g. 'type X(args) = ...'.
Curiously, things started to work if the auto property was declared only after a 'static let' or a 'static do', even an empty 'static do ()' worked.
This bugfix eliminated the need to put in dummy static let/do and makes static autoproperty work
The error message remains in place for instance auto properties ('member val' without static).
Types without constructors are codegen'd as static, therefore instance auto property does not make sense.