Move catsTraverseForSeq to lower-priority implicit scope
#4373
Conversation
|
Thanks!
How did you confirm this, were we getting the same warning in Cats itself?
Unfortunately the Cats build is currently full of warnings, so it's quite possible it's unrelated. |
| @@ -98,9 +98,13 @@ trait UnorderedFoldable[F[_]] extends Serializable { | |||
| unorderedFoldMap(fa)(a => if (p(a)) 1L else 0L) | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| trait LowPriorityImplicits { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| trait LowPriorityImplicits { | |
| private trait UnorderedFoldableLowPriority { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I saw (late) that it couldn't be used later if it was private: private trait UnorderedFoldableLowPriority escapes its defining scope as part of type cats.UnorderedFoldableLowPriority
I changed it to protected, I think it makes sense, what do you think?
Co-authored-by: Arman Bilge <armanbilge@gmail.com>
I replicated the error using the code from the issue, ran it in the repl and got the same warning that @bpholt mentions. Then made the change and ran it again without warnings. I didn't check if the same warning was anywhere in Cats itself |
armanbilge
changed the title
catsTraverseForSeq to lower-priority implicit scope
…ompile as private)
| private trait UnorderedFoldableLowPriority { | ||
| protected trait UnorderedFoldableLowPriority { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hm, was there a compile error if this was private? If so, we should make it private[cats], not protected.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yep, it failed with private trait UnorderedFoldableLowPriority escapes its defining scope as part of type cats.UnorderedFoldableLowPriority , I changed it to private[cats] and compiles. I'm running the prePR and I'll push it
Hi, first (try)pr here. Trying to solve the bug at issue #4370.
I followed the idea to de-prioritize the Seq instance. Though it solves the issue mentioned, it prompts some other warnings at compilation time (I'm not sure it's specific to this change).
As told in the issue, I'll be reading a bit if there is another way around it, unless the solution is considered good enough.
Any ideas or directions are welcome.