Ignore optionality in the comparable relationship#12202
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
|
Looks good. I think this is not the only relaxation one could do here. But it's certainly a start, and more can be added if there are further issues. |
Member
|
👍 |
Member
Author
|
🎉 |
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
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
5 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Fixes #1447.
Fixes #12187.
The intent behind the comparability relationship is that it should succeed if two types could actually be one and the same at runtime. With optionality, the intent is that a property could be there at runtime, and so it makes sense for comparability to take that into account. Comparability should succeed regardless of property optionality.