Account for records in type relatedness checks #4266
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Super awesome!
Might be good to have @bwilkerson take a quick look but LGTM!
| @@ -282,6 +261,39 @@ class InterfaceTypeDefinition { | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| extension on TypeSystem { | |||
| bool interfaceTypesAreUnrelated(InterfaceType type1, InterfaceType type2) { | |||
| // In this case, [leftElement] and [rightElement] each represent | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Consider renaming the parameters to leftElement and rightElement. I think they read better. Otherwise, consider updating the comments to match the current names.
(And I don't understand what "this case" is referring to here, but that's not your problem because you didn't write the original code.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good note; renamed.
I also really didn't understand what that comment referred to. After looking for a few minutes, I decided to just remove it.
| @@ -18,6 +18,28 @@ class UnrelatedTypeEqualityChecksTestLanguage300 extends LintRuleTest | |||
| @override | |||
| String get lintRule => 'unrelated_type_equality_checks'; | |||
|
|
|||
| test_recordAndInterfaceType_unrelated() async { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be good to have some tests involving records with named fields, and maybe some that have both positional and named fields.
Fixes dart-lang/sdk#59108
Uses
isAssignableToto handle relatedness, accounting for shape and subtypes.