Merged
Conversation
SigTyOptionalNode#typecheck was delegating directly to the inner
type's typecheck, which would reject nil values for T? types like
Binding?. Now it skips nil types when checking, since nil is always
valid for optional types.
This fixes false "wrong type of arguments" for calls like
eval("code", nil, "filename") where the second argument is Binding?.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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 join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
SigTyOptionalNode#typecheck was delegating directly to the inner type's typecheck, which would reject nil values for T? types like Binding?. Now it skips nil types when checking, since nil is always valid for optional types.
This fixes false "wrong type of arguments" for calls like eval("code", nil, "filename") where the second argument is Binding?.