Pattern matching for @nullable records. #5453
Merged
Conversation
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
cristianoc
force-pushed
the
nullable_pattern
branch
from
88f85ed to
ccfd480
Compare
This gives pattern matching that mimics expression constructor, where the variable by default is not optional. The generated code seems fine, thought the checks for exhaustiveness are not kicking in. See #5452
A pattern is type checked twice. The second time for the exhaustive check coming from the pattern matcher. The second time constructors, such as optionals, have been replaced by fresh symbols starting with `#$`. Now recognize these symbols and do not apply the transformation which adds Some.
cristianoc
force-pushed
the
nullable_pattern
branch
from
ccfd480 to
5920d81
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This gives pattern matching that mimics expression constructor, where the variable by default is not optional.
The generated code seems fine, thought the checks for exhaustiveness are not kicking in.
See #5452