-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18k
go/types: audit error messages for go1.17 #46404
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
Comments
@findleyr We're close to RC1, and this issue is a release blocker. Any updates? |
Same as #46403. For this, I just need to do a bit of due diligence. Barring surprises, I can close this out by Monday. |
Change https://golang.org/cl/329793 mentions this issue: |
Update: this can be closed once CL 329793 is merged. Fuzzing found this test case relatively quickly, and did not find any others after a long time. I also checked for leaks in our existing test data corpus. I feel satisfied that we've done our due diligence. |
When type checking t[_], where t is a type name, it was possible to leak an error message related to generics. Fix this by guarding on typeparams.Enabled. In order to test this fix, we need to be able to run the new go/types test only if type parameters are disabled. Introduce the .go1 test data suffix (similar to .go2) to control this behavior. Originally found via fuzzing, though the test case was manually simplified. Updates #46404 Change-Id: Ib1e2c27cf974c2a5ca5b9d6d01b84a30ba4d583b Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/329793 Trust: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com> Trust: Robert Griesemer <gri@golang.org> Run-TryBot: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com> TryBot-Result: Go Bot <gobot@golang.org> Reviewed-by: Robert Griesemer <gri@golang.org>
With all the changes to go/types merged from the dev.typeparams branch, many error messages have changed. In general these were all intentional improvements, but we should try to ensure that no error messages related to generics leak in 1.17. Such errors are marked, so fuzz testing might be helpful here, in addition to manual auditing.
CC @griesemer
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: