-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 93
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
DiffOptions: allow controlling use of ANSI markers #885
Conversation
) | ||
|
||
// for MIMA compatibility | ||
@deprecated("Use version with implicit DiffOptions", "1.0.4") |
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 it will work, though if someone is overriding the method it will show an error.
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 provides binary compatibility (the parameters, same order) except I'm not sure if private is sufficient, too; and the new method is source-compatible.
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.
Though if we override it wil fail the compilation or am I missing something:
trait Location
trait A{
def locs(a: String, b: Int, l: Location): Nothing = ???
}
class B extends A{
override def locs(a : String, b: Int)(implicit l : Location) = ???
}
This will fail, so I assume your change should also fail
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 think that it wouldn't fail, or else mina would complain.
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 would think so, which is why I am bit confused. It might be a bug in Mima or alternatively the code produced is binary compatible, just not source compatible.
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.
yes, mima checks for binary. well, if there's minor source incompatibility, increasing the minor version, as you suggested, should be enough. wdyt?
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 guess the odds of someone overwriting the fail method are pretty low 🤔 We should be fine then
Also, exclude `munit.internal.` from MIMA.
@tgodzik thank you. i have no more changes to propose, should i release 1.1.0? |
Nothing from me. |
Also, exclude
munit.internal.
from MIMA.