-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 407
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
Hide ambiguous implicit buildableSeq #788
Conversation
5d96905
to
72f1556
Compare
implicit def buildableSeq[T]: Buildable[T, Seq[T]] = | ||
private[scalacheck] implicit def buildableSeq[T]: Buildable[T, Seq[T]] = |
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.
This is a no-go as far as binary compatibility is concerned. Instead, I propose:
- make the definition non-implicit
- slap a
@deprecated
on it
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.
It's an internal definition, so it needs to exist as an implicit.
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.
I don't think there's any reason to add @deprecated
since nobody likely uses it, and it isn't visible, but I'll do so just to be thorough.
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.
Making it package-private is technically binary compatible, it's just not source compatible. It's an obscure method in an internal object, so I don't think there will be anyone who will even notice the source-breaking change.
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.
It's apparently not binary compatible in this instance, since you had to define a MiMa exception. But your argument that it this definition is not likely to be used publicly is persuasive 👍
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.
It actually it is binary compatible. Mima is just being thorough. The emitted byte code is just not binary compatible for Java callers. ScalaCheck doesn't have any of those. And if we did, they still likely weren't using it for this implicit.
Fixes #721.