Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Aug 15 16:19

    alexarchambault on github_actions

    (compare)

  • Aug 15 16:19
    alexarchambault closed #308
  • Aug 15 16:19

    alexarchambault on main

    Bump coursier/setup-action from… (compare)

  • Aug 15 14:13
    dependabot[bot] labeled #308
  • Aug 15 14:13
    dependabot[bot] opened #308
  • Aug 15 14:13

    dependabot[bot] on github_actions

    Bump coursier/setup-action from… (compare)

  • Aug 12 16:09

    alexarchambault on main

    Update utest to 0.8.0 (#306) (compare)

  • Aug 12 16:09
    alexarchambault closed #306
  • Aug 12 12:08
    scala-steward opened #307
  • Aug 12 12:07
    scala-steward opened #306
  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on master

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on 0.1.x

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on orphans

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on 1.1.x

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on 1.0.x

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on 0.3.x

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on 0.2.x

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:05

    alexarchambault on travis-scala-2.10

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:04

    alexarchambault on v1.3.1

    (compare)

  • Aug 11 09:03
    alexarchambault closed #303
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
I've just pushed a fix for milessabin/shapeless#391 ... it'll show up in the next 2.2.3-SNAPSHOT.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
@milessabin Thanks! I didn't know if the could just be replaced by implicitly like you did, in the fix, I though it was somehow required.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
the would refine the type more that implicitly, but there's no way that we can use that here, so there's no benefit to be gained from using the.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
I hadn't admittedly though much about it :-)
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
I still have no idea why the isn't working in that context. But I don't want to hold up an argonaut-shapeless release because of that.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
@milessabin Both scalacheck-shapeless and argonaut-shapeless (branch 0.3.x) are now fine with orphan derivations. Thumbs up for shapeless 2.2.3.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Awesome!
I'm working on a Generic1 bug and I'll release as soon as I have a fix for that. Fingers X'd today or tomorrow :-)
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
2.2.3 released :-)
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
{scalacheck/argonaut}-shapeless releases in a few hours :-)
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Awesome :-)
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
@/all Just published 0.3.0, targetting shapeless 2.2 (>= 2.2.3), with proper support for shapeless orphan derivation.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
New developments of :point_up: June 4 2015 3:20 AM will be for 0.4.0
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
:sparkles: :fireworks: :clap:
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
@alexarchambault could you try out the latest shapeless snapshot ... I've fixed your nested ADT issues.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
@milessabin Thanks! I'll try asap.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Ta :-)
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
@milessabin A quick update about nested Json (alexarchambault/argonaut-shapeless#9), I ran into what's described here,
that is different implicits being derived by Lazy compared to implicitly. Namely, implicitly find implicits from argonaut.Argonaut, whereas Lazy apparently tries to derive these as ADTs, not viewing those of argonaut.Argonaut, and fails.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Yes, I'm having similar problem right now.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
In what context?
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Deriving orphans for Cats.
The orphan derivation mechanism only appears to be lowering the priority of derived instances at the top level, not in nested contexts ... is that what you're seeing?
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
Not exactly. I'm having the same error with or without orphan derivation.
Lazy seems not to derive the same thing as just implicitly
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Lazy doesn't derive anything ... it just suppresses divergence.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
Yes, I mean: implicits found with implicitly are fine (checked with reify), trying to get the same implicits with Lazy.mkLazy fails
The error says that the macro expansion tries to use types that are private[argonaut], sub-types of argonaut.Json
But these shouldn't be involved. They are not when using just implicitly, as reify confirms.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Hmm ... interesting.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
This notebook illustrates that, if this is fine for you. I'll try to minimize this.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Using Lazy very likely changes which implicits get resolved ... that's the point. Odd that it's able to resolve something which is private though.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
The type I look an implicit for (Map[String, argonaut.Json]) involves an ADT (argonaut.Json) whose subtypes are private
But implicitly is fine with this, whereas Lazy is not.
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Ahh!
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
?? :-)
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Lazy is a red herring here.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
??
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
I think this is a Generic bug ... the Coproduct representation is including private subtypes.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
why does the error pop up when using Lazy, and not when using implicitly then?
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
I think if a sealed trait has private subtypes it shouldn't have a Generic instance.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
... I agree...
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Because Lazy has allowed an implicit search path to be explored which wouldn't be without it.
Like I said, Lazy doesn't derive anything, it just controls divergence.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
Shoudn't Lazy catch this error in a way or another?
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Catch what? A bug in Generic?
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
Why is implicitly fine here?
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
Because Lazy has allowed an implicit search path to be explored which wouldn't be without it.
Alexandre Archambault
@alexarchambault
Yes, I read that... :-)
Miles Sabin
@milessabin
With implicitly we never go down the path that trips the bug.
Does that make sense?