-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 661
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
Constraint check error position is not accurate #9393
Comments
IMO this is not worth fixing. Addressing this in the general case (where there's no 1:1 mapping between argument and type parameter) would require quite a bit of effort which I don't think is justified. It can probably be changed to give the error of the call as a whole instead of the field, but trying to map this to individual arguments seems pretty crazy. |
Is this |
I figured that this was covered by the other tests where the position became more narrow. |
In the example above, the "constraint check failure" error will be reported at the position of
f
(not even the call). I think I understand why that's happening (it's checking the field itself, not really a call argument, right?), but maybe it is possible to store a position of a thing that made T an actual type (1
in this example).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: