| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
Compromise between old compiler error "T.m redeclared in this block"
(where the "in this block" is not particularly helpful) and the old
type-checker error "method m already declared for type T ...".
In the case where we have position information for the original
declaration, the error message is "method T.m already declared at
<position>". The new message is both shorter and more precise.
For #55326.
Change-Id: Id4a7f326fe631b11db9e8030eccb417c72d6c7db
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/435016
Run-TryBot: Robert Griesemer <gri@google.com>
Auto-Submit: Robert Griesemer <gri@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gopher Robot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Robert Griesemer <gri@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Robert Findley <rfindley@google.com>
|
|
Receiver parameters generally aren't relevant to the function
signature type. In particular:
1. When checking whether a type's method implements an interface's
method, we specifically want to ignore the receiver parameters,
because they'll be different.
2. When checking interface type equality, interface methods always
use the same "fakethis" *struct{} type as their receiver.
3. Finally, method expressions and method values degenerate into
receiver-less function types.
The only case where we care about receiver types matching is in
addmethod, which is easily handled by adding an extra Eqtype check of
the receiver parameters. Also, added a test for this, since
(surprisingly) there weren't any.
As precedence, go/types.Identical ignores receiver parameters when
comparing go/types.Signature values.
Notably, this allows us to slightly simplify the "implements"
function, which is used for checking whether type/interface t
implements interface iface. Currently, cmd/compile actually works
around Eqtype's receiver parameter checking by creating new throwaway
TFUNC Types without the receiver parameter.
(Worse, the compiler currently only provides APIs to build TFUNC Types
from Nod syntax trees, so building those throwaway types also involves
first building throwaway syntax trees.)
Passes toolstash -cmp.
Change-Id: Ib07289c66feacee284e016bc312e8c5ff674714f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/20602
Reviewed-by: Robert Griesemer <gri@golang.org>
|
|
R=golang-dev, gri
CC=golang-dev
https://golang.org/cl/5674112
|
|
X ,s;^// \$G (\$D/)?\$F\.go *$;// compile;g
X ,s;^// \$G (\$D/)?\$F\.go && \$L \$F\.\$A *$;// build;g
X ,s;^// \$G (\$D/)?\$F\.go && \$L \$F\.\$A && \./\$A\.out *$;// run;g
X ,s;^// errchk \$G( -e)? (\$D/)?\$F\.go *$;// errorcheck;g
R=golang-dev, bradfitz
CC=golang-dev
https://golang.org/cl/5671080
|
|
Otherwise gccgo gives an extra error message not matched by errchk.
R=adg, rsc
CC=golang-dev
https://golang.org/cl/4053042
|
|
The ken directory is untouched so we have some examples with explicit semis.
R=gri
CC=golang-dev
https://golang.org/cl/2157041
|
|
compile with the current compiler. Adjust expected error
message in method1.go to match 6g output.
R=rsc
DELTA=9 (2 added, 5 deleted, 2 changed)
OCL=33674
CL=33682
|
|
R=rsc
OCL=33382
CL=33391
|
|
TBR=r
OCL=23121
CL=23127
|
|
R=r
OCL=23012
CL=23014
|
|
is recognized by the gccgo testsuite but is ignored by the
errchk script used with 6g.
method1.go:7:1: error: redefinition of 'M': parameter types changed
method1.go:6:1: note: previous definition of 'M' was here
method1.go:10:1: error: redefinition of 'f': parameter types changed
method1.go:9:1: note: previous definition of 'f' was here
method1.go:13:1: error: redefinition of 'g': parameter names changed
method1.go:12:1: note: previous definition of 'g' was here
R=rsc
DELTA=5 (0 added, 0 deleted, 5 changed)
OCL=18962
CL=19058
|
|
R=ken
OCL=17819
CL=17819
|
