-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 301
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
evaluator: conflicting values in for loop with let expressions #3590
Comments
Bisected to 3965579 |
Would you be willing to revert 3965579 ? It appears to be a one-liner, not counting the additional test cases. |
I was able to reproduce this issue. |
@timspeetjens @PierreR - thanks for raising and looking into this. I can indeed confirm that 3965579 is the point at which this broke, with the slightly simpler reducer:
Marcel is deep debugging another issue right now, but I will mark this for the first alpha of v0.12. |
Apologies, I should have been clearer earlier; this affects both v2 and v3 of the evaluator. |
The issue is a regression introduced in https://cuelang.org/cl/1199752 Issue #3590 Issue #3591 Signed-off-by: Marcel van Lohuizen <[email protected]> Change-Id: I1e2a9be08a7957b72c4904856f68af8f9efc3c45 Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1206278 Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <[email protected]> Unity-Result: CUE porcuepine <[email protected]> TryBot-Result: CUEcueckoo <[email protected]>
This only fixes the issue for V2: for v3 this causes too many issues and another solution has to be found. Note that of the tests only letjoin.txtar has material changes. The changes in let.txtar reflect the behavior in V2 from before the regression. All other test changes are counter changes. See the original regression: https://cuelang.org/cl/1199752 Issue #3590 Issue #3591 Signed-off-by: Marcel van Lohuizen <[email protected]> Change-Id: I9ff6496c37dbf21ca58861ee2906d82beaa82e62 Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1206279 TryBot-Result: CUEcueckoo <[email protected]> Unity-Result: CUE porcuepine <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <[email protected]>
The issue is a regression introduced in https://cuelang.org/cl/1199752 Issue #3590 Issue #3591 Signed-off-by: Marcel van Lohuizen <[email protected]> Change-Id: I1e2a9be08a7957b72c4904856f68af8f9efc3c45 Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1206278 Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <[email protected]> Unity-Result: CUE porcuepine <[email protected]> TryBot-Result: CUEcueckoo <[email protected]> Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1207622 Reviewed-by: Paul Jolly <[email protected]>
This only fixes the issue for V2: for v3 this causes too many issues and another solution has to be found. Note that of the tests only letjoin.txtar has material changes. The changes in let.txtar reflect the behavior in V2 from before the regression. All other test changes are counter changes. See the original regression: https://cuelang.org/cl/1199752 Issue #3590 Issue #3591 Signed-off-by: Marcel van Lohuizen <[email protected]> Change-Id: I9ff6496c37dbf21ca58861ee2906d82beaa82e62 Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1206279 TryBot-Result: CUEcueckoo <[email protected]> Unity-Result: CUE porcuepine <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <[email protected]> Reviewed-on: https://review.gerrithub.io/c/cue-lang/cue/+/1207623 Reviewed-by: Paul Jolly <[email protected]>
What version of CUE are you using (
cue version
)?Does this issue reproduce with the latest stable release?
Yes (0.11.0). 0.10.1 runs as expected
What did you do?
What did you expect to see?
Passing test
What did you see instead?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: