- About Scala
- Documentation
- Code Examples
- Software
- Scala Developers
Typed not being removed by explicit outer?
Mon, 2010-08-30, 20:44
Hi,
While working on jribble backend for ScalaGWT I found that I get trees
that contain scala.reflect.generic.Trees.Typed node. When we look at
it's declaration[1] we see:
/** Type annotation, eliminated by explicit outer */
case class Typed(expr: Tree, tpt: Tree)
extends TermTree
Since my backend runs after explicit outer phase I'm wondering why I
see these nodes. Before I dig into can someone tell me if this comment
is still valid?
[1] https://lampsvn.epfl.ch/trac/scala/browser/scala/trunk/src/library/scala...
Sun, 2010-09-05, 06:57
#2
Re: Typed not being removed by explicit outer?
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 7:17 PM, Paul Phillips wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 03:45:02PM -0400, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
>> While working on jribble backend for ScalaGWT I found that I get trees
>> that contain scala.reflect.generic.Trees.Typed node. When we look at
>> it's declaration[1] we see:
>>
>> /** Type annotation, eliminated by explicit outer */
>> case class Typed(expr: Tree, tpt: Tree)
>> extends TermTree
>>
>> Since my backend runs after explicit outer phase I'm wondering why I
>> see these nodes. Before I dig into can someone tell me if this comment
>> is still valid?
>
> It doesn't look valid. Look at GenICode.scala, which runs way after
> explicitouter, and you can see it expecting exception handler cases.
Yes, you are right. I think it would be good if the comment was corrected.
--
Grzegorz
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 03:45:02PM -0400, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
> While working on jribble backend for ScalaGWT I found that I get trees
> that contain scala.reflect.generic.Trees.Typed node. When we look at
> it's declaration[1] we see:
>
> /** Type annotation, eliminated by explicit outer */
> case class Typed(expr: Tree, tpt: Tree)
> extends TermTree
>
> Since my backend runs after explicit outer phase I'm wondering why I
> see these nodes. Before I dig into can someone tell me if this comment
> is still valid?
It doesn't look valid. Look at GenICode.scala, which runs way after
explicitouter, and you can see it expecting exception handler cases.