-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
Avoid an infinite cycle in MakeAcyclicBaseType
#81005
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
How exactly did
FindBaseRefSyntaxcause a cycle? If it cannot handle special types for some reason, shouldn't that be fixed instead to avoid similar issues in the future? #ResolvedThere was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Enum is the only declaration that syntactically has a base list that never contributes to the declared base value.
FindBaseRefSyntaxlooks for a type reference in a base list. It attempts to bind types in the list, lookup needs to know base type, and for anenum, we end up here again, due to the same reason - base type is not in the base list, when we are binding types in it, we are not resolving bases. For scenarios whendeclaredBaseisn't a result of binding of a name from base list, it doesn't make sense trying to find the type in that list.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder whether we should just have
FindBaseRefSyntaxbail early forstructs andenums instead. That would also have the benefit of preventing such a cycle from sneaking back in in the future if we need to get the base syntax in a new location.Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think this is the right thing to do. The purpose of
FindBaseRefSyntaxis to find type reference in the base list. There is nothing wrong in using it forenumtype in general. It is not appropriate for the method to decide whether it is Ok to look into the list. This specific use of the method is troublesome, especially because, in this particular case, we are looking for something that we know isn't there.