-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Yet some more uniquifying of implicit names #1122
Conversation
I think this is the last of the implicit names for typelevel#1061.
Current coverage is 88.68%@@ master #1122 diff @@
==========================================
Files 227 227
Lines 2992 2987 -5
Methods 2943 2939 -4
Messages 0 0
Branches 47 46 -1
==========================================
- Hits 2651 2649 -2
+ Misses 341 338 -3
Partials 0 0
|
new Predicate[A] { | ||
def apply(a: A) = ev.neqv(a, A.empty) | ||
} | ||
|
||
lazy val proved = Prop(Result(status = Proof)) |
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.
Just curious what makes this one redundant?
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 good catch I meant to ask people about this.
@non @johnynek: this seemed a little suspicious to me. I can understand the parameters being implicit, but why was the def
itself implicit? It wasn't actually used in cats and didn't appear to be in algebra, so I removed it. Is this something that should be kept around?
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.
Let's remove it. I'm not sure what I was thinking.
👍 |
1 similar comment
👍 |
I think this is the last of the implicit names for #1061.
@kailuowang would you be willing to review this?