Report duplicate TypeVar definitions#3968
Conversation
|
Hi @binitpoks-code! Thank you for your pull request and welcome to our community. Action RequiredIn order to merge any pull request (code, docs, etc.), we require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement, and we don't seem to have one on file for you. ProcessIn order for us to review and merge your suggested changes, please sign at https://code.facebook.com/cla. If you are contributing on behalf of someone else (eg your employer), the individual CLA may not be sufficient and your employer may need to sign the corporate CLA. Once the CLA is signed, our tooling will perform checks and validations. Afterwards, the pull request will be tagged with If you have received this in error or have any questions, please contact us at cla@meta.com. Thanks! |
|
Thank you for signing our Contributor License Agreement. We can now accept your code for this (and any) Meta Open Source project. Thanks! |
Hi, thanks for assigning this issue to me.
This PR adds a focused binder-time check for duplicate legacy
TypeVardefinitions. Previously, Pyrefly accepted duplicate definitions like this without reporting an error:After this change, the second definition reports a redefinition error.
The change is intentionally kept small and limited to the existing legacy
TypeVarbinding path. I also added a regression test ingeneric_legacy.rsto cover this case.Fixes #3754
Test Plan
cargo test test_tvar_duplicate_definitioncargo test generic_legacy