Skip to content
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

WIP - Retrieve java classes with resolve and fix #86 again #93

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

arichiardi
Copy link
Contributor

@arichiardi arichiardi commented Jun 20, 2020

Before submitting a PR make sure the following things have been done:

  • The commits are consistent with our contribution guidelines
  • You've added tests to cover your change(s)
  • All tests are passing
  • The new code is not generating reflection warnings

Please don't merge! 😄

{:pre [(= dialect :clj)]}
(println "###")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's much easier to debug with the debugger. ;-)

@arichiardi arichiardi force-pushed the fix-86-2 branch 2 times, most recently from b8fe44c to f4670e7 Compare July 13, 2020 02:04
This patch unfixes clojure-emacs#86. It basically tries to restore a more linear flow in
clj-info and orchard.java, distinguishing a bit more between qualified and
unqualified patterns.
@bbatsov
Copy link
Member

bbatsov commented Jan 4, 2021

Any updates here?

@yuhan0
Copy link
Contributor

yuhan0 commented Oct 8, 2021

I believe this is superseded by the changes in #123 and #134?

@vemv
Copy link
Member

vemv commented Oct 8, 2021

Partly yes, but it also appears that this PR proposes some valuable refinements for Java class/method resolution.

At the same time if refining them we should come up with some failing tests cases first so we can see what is wrong (probably not much at this point!).

I believe closing this PR is the right thing simply for not inviting the author to waste time solving merge conflicts for a mostly-addressed problem. I'd want to favor small diffs that solve one problem at a time / won't solve again what we already got right.

However we can try again from scratch 👍

@vemv vemv closed this Oct 8, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants