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

Follow up on def vs val in #940 #965

Closed
ceedubs opened this issue Apr 3, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Follow up on def vs val in #940 #965

ceedubs opened this issue Apr 3, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@ceedubs
Copy link
Contributor

ceedubs commented Apr 3, 2016

In #940 some implicit instances that seemed like they should be able to be vals were forced to be defs. It would be nice to follow up on that - to try to figure out why that was and whether we can do something about it.

cc @djspiewak

@djspiewak
Copy link
Member

Here's a quick instance where this happens:

implicit def optionTTransLift: TransLift.Aux[OptionT, Functor] =
Haven't tried in a while, but when I first wrote this line, swapping it from a def to a val made the implicit it provides unresolvable (the tests will fail to compile, so it's easy to check).

@ceedubs
Copy link
Contributor Author

ceedubs commented Apr 4, 2016

@djspiewak yes, I saw the same behavior when I didn't believe you and tried to change it to a val :P

@djspiewak
Copy link
Member

@ceedubs Doubter… ;-)

@ceedubs
Copy link
Contributor Author

ceedubs commented Mar 25, 2018

This is no longer relevant after #1621.

@ceedubs ceedubs closed this as completed Mar 25, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants