- Sponsor
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
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
Move code_typed and return_types out of inference #11600
Merged
+39
−41
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
Move code_typed and return_types out of inference. Fix #11590
- v1.11.3
- v1.11.2
- v1.11.1
- v1.11.0
- v1.11.0-rc4
- v1.11.0-rc3
- v1.11.0-rc2
- v1.11.0-rc1
- v1.11.0-beta2
- v1.11.0-beta1
- v1.11.0-alpha2
- v1.11.0-alpha1
- v1.10.8
- v1.10.7
- v1.10.6
- v1.10.5
- v1.10.4
- v1.10.3
- v1.10.2
- v1.10.1
- v1.10.0
- v1.10.0-rc3
- v1.10.0-rc2
- v1.10.0-rc1
- v1.10.0-beta3
- v1.10.0-beta2
- v1.10.0-beta1
- v1.10.0-alpha1
- v1.9.4
- v1.9.3
- v1.9.2
- v1.9.1
- v1.9.0
- v1.9.0-rc3
- v1.9.0-rc2
- v1.9.0-rc1
- v1.9.0-beta4
- v1.9.0-beta3
- v1.9.0-beta2
- v1.9.0-beta1
- v1.9.0-alpha1
- v1.8.5
- v1.8.4
- v1.8.3
- v1.8.2
- v1.8.1
- v1.8.0
- v1.8.0-rc4
- v1.8.0-rc3
- v1.8.0-rc2
- v1.8.0-rc1
- v1.8.0-beta3
- v1.8.0-beta2
- v1.8.0-beta1
- v1.7.3
- v1.7.2
- v1.7.1
- v1.7.0
- v1.7.0-rc3
- v1.7.0-rc2
- v1.7.0-rc1
- v1.7.0-beta4
- v1.7.0-beta3
- v1.7.0-beta2
- v1.7.0-beta1
- v1.6.7
- v1.6.6
- v1.6.5
- v1.6.4
- v1.6.3
- v1.6.2
- v1.6.1
- v1.6.0
- v1.6.0-rc3
- v1.6.0-rc2
- v1.6.0-rc1
- v1.6.0-beta1
- v1.5.4
- v1.5.3
- v1.5.2
- v1.5.1
- v1.5.0
- v1.5.0-rc2
- v1.5.0-rc1
- v1.5.0-beta1
- v1.4.2
- v1.4.1
- v1.4.0
- v1.4.0-rc2
- v1.4.0-rc1
- v1.3.1
- v1.3.0
- v1.3.0-rc5
- v1.3.0-rc4
- v1.3.0-rc3
- v1.3.0-rc2
- v1.3.0-rc1
- v1.3.0-alpha
- v1.2.0
- v1.2.0-rc3
- v1.2.0-rc2
- v1.2.0-rc1
- v1.1.1
- v1.1.0
- v1.1.0-rc2
- v1.1.0-rc1
- v1.0.5
- v1.0.4
- v1.0.3
- v1.0.2
- v1.0.1
- v1.0.0
- v1.0.0-rc1
- v0.7.0
- v0.7.0-rc3
- v0.7.0-rc2
- v0.7.0-rc1
- v0.7.0-beta2
- v0.7.0-beta
- v0.7.0-alpha
- v0.6.4
- v0.6.3
- v0.6.2
- v0.6.1
- v0.6.0
- v0.6.0-rc3
- v0.6.0-rc2
- v0.6.0-rc1
- v0.6.0-pre.beta
- v0.6.0-pre.alpha
- v0.5.2
- v0.5.1
- v0.5.0
- v0.5.0-rc4
- v0.5.0-rc3
- v0.5.0-rc2
- v0.5.0-rc1
- v0.5.0-rc0
- v0.4.7
- v0.4.6
- v0.4.5
- v0.4.4
- v0.4.3
- v0.4.2
- v0.4.1
- v0.4.0
- v0.4.0-rc4
- v0.4.0-rc3
- v0.4.0-rc2
- v0.4.0-rc1
commit 336282aa33e2f943d0140961c28e85db843531ba
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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.
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.
It was using the wrong "call" function here. @JeffBezanson is it possible to express the notion of "the call function that would have been visible to the callee" in this function? (cough#11452cough)
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.
Oh, yeah. This is exactly why I felt so strange when I saw #11452 .....
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.
Although hopefully this is not blocking the PR. Since this is also the old behavior.
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.
no, although it means you could also fix this by doing a one-liner change from
call
toMain.Base.call
here.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.
@vtjnash Will that do it? This is in the
Base
module and thecall
should already beBase.call
. No?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.
no, and that's the current behavior. This
call
refers toCore.Inference.call
because of the file that it is in, notMain.Base.call
.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.
@vtjnash Ahh. Maybe that's why it was broken before then. This used to be only defined in
Core.Inference
with a wrapper inBase
. After moving it out ofInference
, thecall
is pointing to the correct function now. (Note thatreflection.jl
is also included insysimg.jl
)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.
@vtjnash Somehow I always thought you what you meant is that the code in this PR is having problem getting the correct
call
.So should I do the one-liner (ok maybe two since there's also
return_types
) and experimenting with moving these out ofInference
in another PR?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 think it's fine to move these out with this PR, I just wanted to point out why this worked (more than just "seems to fix it") and see if @JeffBezanson could recommend any other improvement
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.
One thing that can be done is to have the macros generate an escaped
call
symbol, in order to pass thecall
function from the calling context.The general problem is a case like
methods(call, Tuple{Any, ...
, where you obviously can't look at the first argument to see what modulecall
is from.