Fix infinite recursive generics #24211
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
|
Another approach is to make the method non-recursive - this results in a tiny bit more code duplication, but makes it overall clearer for me personally (recursion always adds a mental tax): I played around with it a while back: roji@5a6251a. @AndriySvyryd let us know what you think. |
AndriySvyryd
approved these changes
Feb 22, 2021
|
Thanks for your contribution! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Fix infinite recursive generics
Using recursive generics with nested type parameters will make AOT compilers impossible to complete compilation, because all methods and types need to be resolved at compile-time, but compiler has no way to know how many levels of recursion need to be expanded.
In this PR, I made the type of
operationandverifySucceededinExecuteImplementandExecuteImplementAsyncbe same to avoid recursive generics call withTResult = ExecutionResult<TResult>. It's a better way to fix the issue than previously attempt #20494 and won't affect maintainability and introduce any public API changes.Fixes #20393