Skip to content

Update scala3-compiler, scala3-library, ... to 3.3.9 - #1003

Open
typelevel-steward[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
update/scala3-compiler-3.3.9
Open

typelevel-steward[bot] wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
update/scala3-compiler-3.3.9

Conversation

@typelevel-steward

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

About this PR

📦 Updates

from 3.3.7 to 3.3.9

📜 GitHub Release Notes - Version Diff

Usage

✅ Please merge!

I'll automatically update this PR to resolve conflicts as long as you don't change it yourself.

If you'd like to skip this version, you can just close this PR. If you have any feedback, just mention me in the comments below.

Configure Scala Steward for your repository with a .scala-steward.conf file.

Have a fantastic day writing Scala!

⚙ Adjust future updates

Add this to your .scala-steward.conf file to ignore future updates of this dependency:

updates.ignore = [ { groupId = "org.scala-lang" } ]

Or, add this to slow down future updates of this dependency:

dependencyOverrides = [{
  pullRequests = { frequency = "30 days" },
  dependency = { groupId = "org.scala-lang" }
}]
labels: library-update, early-semver-patch, semver-spec-patch, commit-count:1

final class Slf4jLogger[F[_]](
val logger: JLogger,
sync: Sync.Type,
@unused sync: Sync.Type,

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Honestly, I don't like this workaround because it's clearly a scala3 compiler quirk. sync is by no means unused. I'll try to submit a minimal repro to the scala/scala3 tracker.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Here it goes scala/scala3#27449.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

So, we've got a response that it's deliberate new behavior in scala3. So, we have no choice but to @unused.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🤷 I guess it calls into question whether the deprecated constructor isn't correct again.

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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