improve compiler error message for failed overload resolution #6596
Conversation
...s/fsharpqa/Source/ErrorMessages/OverloadResolution/E_System.Convert.ToString.OverloadList.fs
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
2 times, most recently
from
f577797
to
e2d0c20
Compare
|
Few notes for myself & reviewers that would like to validate my approach. I've been stepping around the overload resolution code, for now I'm considering this option for implementation:
(need to check the other call site to
I was considering building the whole message in |
|
I'm trying to understand the reason for I'd see the caller arguments as either:
I'm not sure what is the extra nesting in a list is used for? edit: consolidating into |
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
2 times, most recently
from
8bb7060
to
3533a60
Compare
|
Just a note listing the fsharpqa tests that started failing when I changed the error message a bit (https://dev.azure.com/dnceng/public/_build/results?buildId=164032). I want to investigate how those flow through
|
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
from
b9c3649
to
50a3a33
Compare
|
open/close principle for CI |
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
5 times, most recently
from
bcc468c
to
b258027
Compare
…cted by dotnet#6596 the baseline files are empty on purpose, expecting CI failure reporting those tests, I intend to update the baseline and clean up the comments / xml tags from fsharpqa syntax in later commit, and then remove those specific tests altogether from fsharpqa if this is OK with the maintainers.
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
from
a2babef
to
b46f052
Compare
…n error messages) (#6654) * migrate (as a separate copy) fsharpqa tests that are going to be impacted by #6596 the baseline files are empty on purpose, expecting CI failure reporting those tests, I intend to update the baseline and clean up the comments / xml tags from fsharpqa syntax in later commit, and then remove those specific tests altogether from fsharpqa if this is OK with the maintainers. * update the .bsl files * remove comments that are handled by baseline files, update baseline files * remove the migrated tests from fsharpqa tests * need to be more careful when migrating those * testing if running the test with .fs instead of .fsx makes them work on .netcore * exclude migrated fsharpqa from dotnet core run
|
the work is progressing, there are new tests failling in fsharpqa, that i'll probably move in this PR
This is going through a code path I haven't yet stepped through (units of measure show in the test) and need adjustment to the message building logic, I'll look further toward the end of the week. |
|
@smoothdeveloper Wonderful! |
|
VS error box (left=after,right=before): VS Tooltip before: VS Tooltip (alternate message, filtered on ref types) before (single line message in tooltip woes): VS Tooltip (alternate message, filtered on ref types) after: The experience in FSI is also good. I've fixed the windows desktop failing tests but now new fsharpqa test is failing. Pushing some minor changes to do a full run again. |
|
@smoothdeveloper Absolutely wonderful! |
|
This is green but I had to disable the fsharpqa optimization / inlining test: 8514f09 |
smoothdeveloper
changed the title
|
Green again and ready for review. |
smoothdeveloper
force-pushed
the
overload-list-error-message
branch
from
bd7edfc
to
4141681
Compare
…could not be determined based on type information prior to this program point. A type annotation may be needed." if there are no optional parts.
|
I've removed the xlf from the diff, they should be added to .gitignore, and in case external contributors want to contribute translations, a guideline written to enable it; as of now, xlf seems like an internal MSFT thing with no impact on contributions to this repository beside generating more questions / diff / merge conflicts. @dsyme, I've fixed the recent conflict and it is (allegedly soon) green again. @cartermp said on slack it were now dependent on your aproval and I feel our degree of confidence about the changes have passed the bar, also the change is as minimal as we'd want to not disrupt other branches were work is happening. I'll definitely be around on simple ping for any adjustment needed on top of this work if needed, in separate PRs, but maintaing this long lived branch through merged changes I don't have good grasp on is becoming harder and increasing the overhead of impact versus cumulated time spent by everyone involved. Once merged, Ionide and Rider users will also benefit from the changes once they land in FCS, leading to potentially more input / feedback from end users before this ships in Visual Studio / dotnet SDK. The efforts I spend on rebasing without glitching / losing anything, and the lack of better messages in ongoing work dealing with method overload are adding extra incentives to get it merged, let's do it 🙂. |
|
It is really green. |
|
Comment removed, thanks @dsyme! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I like the overall change and feel generally comfortable with the number of suggestions, since it's quite rare to have an enormous amount of overloads and that is something that could be adjusted over time.
Another thing to consider for a separate PR would be to integrate these suggestions with tooling. There we'd have to trim the set of suggestions, since 10+ items in a quick fix menu doesn't work. But that's a separate concern I think.
|
@KevinRansom wanna take a look? |
|
Yeet |
|
Is yeet good or bad ? I thought it was throwing things of a cliff? |
|
sometimes you have to yeet things to see them fly |
…#6596) * migrate (as a separate copy) fsharpqa tests that are going to be impacted by dotnet#6596 the baseline files are empty on purpose, expecting CI failure reporting those tests, I intend to update the baseline and clean up the comments / xml tags from fsharpqa syntax in later commit, and then remove those specific tests altogether from fsharpqa if this is OK with the maintainers. * update the .bsl files * remove comments that are handled by baseline files, update baseline files * remove the migrated tests from fsharpqa tests * need to be more careful when migrating those * testing if running the test with .fs instead of .fsx makes them work on .netcore * exclude migrated fsharpqa from dotnet core run * sample test in fsharpqa (can't run locally for now) * trying to make it green now. * checking if this path is covered by a test, trying to identify how to trigger this other overload related error message * * [MethodCalls.fs] Defining CallerArgs<'T> in, this replaces passing of callerArgsCount, uncurriedCallerArgs and other variants in the overload resolution logic happening in ConstraintSolver & TypeChecker * [TypeChecker.fs] pass CallerArgs instace at call sites for overload resolution + some commented code as we'll be building a list of given argument types (probably moving as a CallerArgs method or property) * [ConstraintSolver.fs/fsi] pipe the overload resolution traced callback to `trace.CollectThenUndoOrCommit` as that expression is long and more important in that context * bit of refactoring of error message building logic during failed overload resolution [ConstraintSolver.fsi] * define OverloadInformation and OverloadResolutionFailure, those replace workflow where `string * ((CalledMeth<_> * exn) list)` values were created at call site mixed with message building and matched later in non obvious fashion in `failOverloading` closure * adjust UnresolvedOverloading and PossibleOverload exceptions [ConstraintSolver.fs] * get rid of `GetPossibleOverloads`, this was used only in `failOverloading` closure, and just being passed the same parameters at call site * give `failOverloading` a more meaningful signature and consolidate the prefix message building logic there * fix `failOverloading` call sites [CompilerOps.fs] adjust pattern matching Expecting behaviour of this code to be identical as before PR ` * (buildfix) harmonizing .fsi/.fs right before commit doesn't always work with simple copy paste. * trying to check what kind of things break loose when I change this I'm trying to identify why we get `(CalledMeth<Expr> * exn list)`, I'm making a cartesian product through getMethodSlotsAndErrors for now, trying to figure out if we can get other than 0 or 1 exception in the list for a given method slot. I may revert that one if it doesn't make sense make from a reviewer standpoint and/or breaks fsharpqa tests surounding overload resolution error messages. * (minor) [ConstraintSolver.fs] revert space mishapps to reduce diff, put back comments where they were * toward displaying the argument names properly (may fail some fsharpqa tests for now) * missing Resharper's Ctrl+Alt+V "introduce variable" refactoring @auduchinok :) * pretty print unresolved overloads without all the type submsumption per overload verbose messages * Overload resolution error messages: things display like I want in fsi, almost like I want in VS2019, this is for the simple non generic method overload case. I want to check if user experience changes wrt dotnet#2503 and put some time to add tests. * adjust message for candidates overload * Hijack the split phase for UnresolvedOverloading, remove the match on PossibleOverload. It consolidates some more of the string building logic, and it now shows as a single compact and exhaustive error message in VS Thinking I'll change PossibleOverload to not be an exception if going this way is OK * updating existing failing baseline files that looks correct to me * quickfix for update.base.line.with.actuals.fsx so that it skips missing base line files in the loop * (minor) minimize diff, typos, comments * fix vsintegration tests affected by overload error message changes * merge issue unused variable warning * update the 12 fsharpqa migrated baseline with new error messages * (minor) baseline update script [update.base.line.with.actuals.fsx] * add few directories * error handling (when tests are running, the .err files are locked * move System.Convert.ToString and System.Threading.Tasks.Task.Run tests from QA * * moving 3 fsharpqa tests to new test suite * bring back neg_System.Convert.ToString.OverloadList.fsx which I mistakenly removed during merge * consolidate all string building logic in CompileOps.fs, fix remaining cases with missing \n (the end result code is less whack-a-mole-ish) * update base lines * remove the migrated tests from fsharpqa * fix vstest error message * fix env.lst, removed wrong one... * update baselines of remaining tests * adding one simple test with many overloads * appropriate /// comments on `CalledMeth` constructor arguments * minimize diff / formatting * trim unused code * add simple test, one message is interesting, mentioning parameter count for possible overloads * comment flaky test for now * code review on the `coerceExpr` function from @TIHan, we can discard first `isOutArg` argument as the only hardcoded usage was guarded by `error` when the value is true, and passing an explicit false which is now guaranteed equivalent to `callerArg.IsOptional` * code formatting remarks on ConstraintSolver.fs/fsi * (minor) formatting * format known argument type / updating .bsl * update missing baseline * update missing baselines * update missing baseline * minor: make TTrait better in debugger display * [wip] pass TraitConstraintInfo around failed overload resolution error, and try to display some of it's info * minimize diff * signature file mismatch * removing duplicate in fscomp.txt * surfacing initial bits of TraitConstraintInfo, roughly for now * formatting types of known argument in one go, the formatting is still wrong: * unamed type arguments aren't relabelled (still show their numerical ids) * SRTP constraints are dismissed, not sure how they should be lined up to pass to SimplifyTypes.CollectInfo * rework of overload failure message to prettify *ALL* types in a single go, not only argument types, but return types and known generic argument types (this info was never displayed originally but is useful for scenario similar to FSharpPlus implementation) added `PrettifyDiscriminantAndTypePairs` in TastOps, this allow to weave extra information with the complete list of types, to help reconstituting the several types from their origin (in the usage spot: argument types, return type, generic parameter types) * fixup the tests and add two tests * one checking on the new information of known return type and generic parameter types * one checking we don't leak internal unammed Typar and that they don't all get named 'a despite being different * updating baselines that got tighter. * simplify handling of TraitConstraintInfo * naming couple of fields and turning a property to a methods as it triggers an assert in debugger when inspecting variables * comments in the assembling of overload resolution error message * Add information about which argument doesn't match Add couple of tests Updating bunch of baselines * minor updates to testguide and devguide * fix PrimitiveConstraints.``Invalid object constructor`` test * fix(?) salsa tests * minimize diff * put back tests under !FSHARP_SUITE_DRIVES_CORECLR_TESTS * missing updated message * minor adjustments to TESTGUIDE.md * return type was missing prettifying in prettyLayoutsOfUnresolvedOverloading * address code review nits / minimize diff / add comment on PrettifyDiscriminantAndTypePairs * minimize diff * proposed work around the flaky error message until dotnet#6725 has a fix we keep the fsharpqa test around (but removing the overload error messages from what is asserted out of it) in the meantime * fixing baselines of new tests from master * sisyphus round of baseline update * removing type which isn't in use and popped back up after rebase * minimize diff * tidy inconsistent tuple literal * * removing TTrait properties that end up not being used * renaming tys and returnTy fields to better match convention (`tys` is used, so no underscore prefix) * minimizing diff * minimize diff * minimize diff * minimize diff * link to usage example in same file * revert converting CallerArg single cased DU into Record * minimize diff * minimize diff * minimize diff * fix rebase glitches * fix rebase glitch * update baseline * fix base lines / new tests base lines * edge case: needs a new line after "A unique overload for method '%s' could not be determined based on type information prior to this program point. A type annotation may be needed." if there are no optional parts. * updating base line for edge case of missing new line * missing baseline * removing comment
Work related to method overload resolution error messages: #6578.