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

chore: Brillig call return type check #4282

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Feb 7, 2024
Merged

Conversation

vezenovm
Copy link
Contributor

@vezenovm vezenovm commented Feb 6, 2024

Description

Problem*

Resolves

Followup to #4280 which added a Brillig call check in SSA and #4281 which type checks the arguments to an unconstrained call.

Summary*

#4280 added a type check that is only caught during SSA as it was simpler for comparing the runtimes of function as well as encompassing any use of generics for an unconstrained function definition. However, we can still catch the error earlier in type check.

I also removed the specific tag-line as mentioned in this comment. However, as Vec is the only non-obvious place a slice may be used I think the specific tag-line is ok in this case.

Additional Context

Documentation*

Check one:

  • No documentation needed.
  • Documentation included in this PR.
  • [Exceptional Case] Documentation to be submitted in a separate PR.

PR Checklist*

  • I have tested the changes locally.
  • I have formatted the changes with Prettier and/or cargo fmt on default settings.

Base automatically changed from mv/mut_ref_to_brillig_err to master February 7, 2024 02:50
@vezenovm vezenovm added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 7, 2024
@github-merge-queue github-merge-queue bot removed this pull request from the merge queue due to failed status checks Feb 7, 2024
@vezenovm vezenovm added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 7, 2024
Merged via the queue into master with commit 682b159 Feb 7, 2024
31 checks passed
@vezenovm vezenovm deleted the mv/brillig-return-type-check branch February 7, 2024 21:44
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants