-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 91
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
Update to Scala 3.0.0-RC1 #312
Conversation
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@ | |||
package munit.internal |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what was the reason for this compat file? (out of curiosity)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also, we can probably remove the equivalent M2 file
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One small change val source = value.asTerm.pos.sourceCode.getOrElse("")
Maybe that is already thee in M3 ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it seems worth trying
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, it seems to compile ok. Though I am still following up about the docs.
beb3677
to
ae20b7a
Compare
Created a PR for sbt updates: #313 |
Now that #313 is in, rebasing this should fix all the outstanding issues 🤞 |
63ad20d
to
9df3860
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We also need to update the compatibility table in the docs
9df3860
to
5175ed7
Compare
I think that's updated automatically. |
if (isNotScala211(partialVersion)) | ||
"org.scalacheck" %%% "scalacheck" % "1.15.3" | ||
else | ||
"org.scalacheck" %%% "scalacheck" % "1.15.2" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If ScalaCheck has dropped 2.11 then I won’t oppose dropping it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We use 2.11 in Metals so maybe it’s worth supporting for that usecase alone.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Right. I would then probably defer it to when Metals will drop 2.11 (it seems fair to do it in a bit, since native is now supporting more recent Scala versions)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think 2.11 is still quite heavily used by companies on spark. I have mixed feelings about having deprecated 2.11 in Metals. I haven’t looked at the download numbers to confirm.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, let's look at the numbers and see what's the situation. On one end, those numbers are indicative, but on the other they're not independent: if the ecosystem nudges you to move forward, you probably do, at some point. And Metals is part of the ecosystem.
@tgodzik you're right, sometimes I forgets this nice treats of automation 🍬 |
5175ed7
to
6c04cef
Compare
@tgodzik found this reference to M2:
We can probably remove the Plus we need to update the test-release script |
6c04cef
to
cfc27b9
Compare
Thanks @gabro! I think it should be finally ready 😅 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looking great!
Fixes #311