-
-
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
Minimizing typeclass surface in cats-kernel #1997
Minimizing typeclass surface in cats-kernel #1997
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1997 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 95.24% 95.26% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 301 301
Lines 4922 4919 -3
Branches 123 125 +2
==========================================
- Hits 4688 4686 -2
+ Misses 234 233 -1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Can you rebase with master? :) |
3ad2aa9
to
cedb6ee
Compare
this wil fail Mima test , need to add some exceptions 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.
Thanks for making these changes!
|
…tations to companion
c01b4d6
to
b313bc2
Compare
@kailuowang Rebased with the latest master, should solve the SortedSetSuite problem. PS: my git-fu is minimal, how should I combine the above commits to avoid polluting the history? |
We should also remove the tests corresponding to the old Note: I could restore this optimization by pattern matching on the type of derived |
Its okay to have multiple trivial commits in a PR. We will squash merge into one commit. I myself don't see it necessary to optimize .reverse.reverse. Testing it against the law doesn't hurt though right? |
It doesn't hurt, but it's unnecessary, as the |
In this commit, the "on" method was removed from cat's Eq trait. The "by" method which was using that method was reimplemented..
In that PR, the "on" method was removed from cat's Eq trait. The "by" method which was using that method was reimplemented..
As per #1995