fix #1431: Avoid rewriting lambdas into ambiguous references #1432
Conversation
Note that this uses the expensive `SuggestedFixes.compilesWithFix` check which can result in poor performance, particularly on large projects. Fortunately this case isn't very common (no occurrences in a very large internal project).
Generate changelog in
|
| @@ -170,8 +168,8 @@ private Description convertMethodInvocations( | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| return buildFix(methodSymbol, methodInvocation, root, state, isLocal(methodInvocation)) | |||
| .map(fix -> | |||
| buildDescription(root).setMessage(MESSAGE).addFix(fix).build()) | |||
| .filter(fix -> SuggestedFixes.compilesWithFix(fix, state)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a quick and dirty fix, we can write something more precise in the future if we find performance suffers.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ahh, I didn't see a good way to do the ambiguous check on the lambda/method reference receiver, but this would catch it. Should we put this filter in the buildFix method itself to catch any other potential invalid transforms?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not aware of other paths that result in ambiguous behavior, I'd prefer to catch specific causes so we can add test cases for them, and hopefully write more precise fixes that don't involve recompilation.
|
// policy? |
|
policy bot has been sad today. |
|
🤖 🍿 |
|
Released 3.32.1 |
Before this PR
Produced code that did not work in some scenarios.
After this PR
==COMMIT_MSG==
Avoid rewriting lambdas into ambiguous references
==COMMIT_MSG==
Possible downsides?
Note that this uses the expensive
SuggestedFixes.compilesWithFixcheck which can result in poor performance, particularly on large
projects.
Fortunately this case isn't very common (no occurrences in a
very large internal project).