Skip to content
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

type unification regression #733

Open
purpleidea opened this issue Jan 29, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

type unification regression #733

purpleidea opened this issue Jan 29, 2024 · 3 comments

Comments

@purpleidea
Copy link
Owner

This simple code used to work. I think I broke it, and it fails at type unification. Add a simple test in TestAstFunc1 and bisect the regression! Bonus points if you have a fix, although please ask for help before digging too deeply into it.

http:server ":8080" {
	timeout => 60,		# XXX why is this breaking type unification?
}

Broken in 7777107
Worked some time not too long ago.

@ollytom
Copy link
Contributor

ollytom commented Jan 30, 2024

Sounds like what I could do is add a new test in txtar format in lang/interpret_test/TestAstFunc1
then do something like:

git checkout master
cd lang
git bisect start HEAD 0.0.24 -- .

Then as I go, do go test -run TestAstFunc1 and see what pops up?
I'm assuming the tag 0.0.24 is a "good" commit here, but I see there's been approx. 160 commits since...

Not sure yet what will go in the test mcl file but just wanted to see if this strategy is what you had in mind?
What do you think?

@purpleidea
Copy link
Owner Author

purpleidea commented Jan 30, 2024

Sounds perfect! Note that TestAstFunc1 has sub tests, so you can -run TestAstFunc1/test_#11_ (or whatever number it is) to just run the one test. If you run the test with -short, it will show you all the numbers. Keep in mind the number are unfortunately not stable between commits necessarily. So name it 000.txtar or something to ensure it's always first.

@purpleidea
Copy link
Owner Author

FYI: I have a large feature branch which is not yet finished, that totally rewrites type unification and solving, so this issue should probably be ignored for now, until that's merged. With any luck we'll have fixed the bug.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants