Generic union type with non nested derived types #61
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
…that are not declared as nested types
Member
Author
|
Thinking about this a bit more, I dont think it makes sense for a case to be less generic (e.g. deriving form the base with a fixed type), just as it does not make sense for the case to be more generic (having an additional generic parameter). So I am not sure if this PR is going to have the intended effect, I may have to think about this before it can be merged |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
When a union type is generic, and a derived type is declared not as a nested type, then the type parameter
Tis not considered to be equal between the base and the derived type since it is declared separately, and the generator whould not recognise the derived types as such.This PR fixes that. Factory methods are not generated if the non-nested definition restricts the generic type argument to a specific type or if the type parameter has a different name (which could still be supported if we remember a mapping of the parameter names and exchange the parameter types)