-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 67
Union Return type consistency #1508
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
57f44b8
Fine-tunes UnionType return types
markwpearce cb8ed39
Deals with union of unions and adds transpile tests
markwpearce 9dec2b3
Changes union type tranpilation to give dynamic when using unlike types
markwpearce c745e9c
Merge branch 'v1' into return_type_consistency
TwitchBronBron File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 brightscript would coerce an
integerinto alonginteger, which would technically not be expected behavior. Should this one be dynamic?@chrisdp what do you think of this one?
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
double or float... that goes todouble.integer or longinteger(test3) ->longintegerThere 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.
Sorry, yeah I was talking more generally about those use cases. Must have selected the wrong one. My concern applies to both
integer or longinteger -> longintegeranddouble or float -> double.If a function returns a
floatsometimes, or adoubleother times, I think the original underlying return type should be respected at runtime. By transpiling to the "more precise" data type, it'll prevent theless precisedata type from ever leaving the function. There could be code on the outside looking for "is this a float" or "is this a double" that wouldn't be properly respected with this.My vote would be for these two situations to transpile to
dynamic.