Upgrade to ASM 9.1, for JDK 17 support in the optimizer; also support -target:jvm-17
#9489
Conversation
This file contains 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
fixes scala/bug#12332 on 2.13.x (2.12.x PR is scala#9488)
|
I don't think we need to do a separate community build run before merging. the next Scala SHA bump in the community build will test this along with other recent PRs. |
SethTisue
changed the title
-target:jvm-17
|
Ima go ahead and merge this (Dale is off this week and Lukas is mostly off, and anyway I don't think there's anything that needs review). |
|
Thanks! |
smarter
added a commit
to dotty-staging/dotty
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2021
Scala 2 PR: scala/scala#9489
SethTisue
changed the title
-target:jvm-17-target:jvm-17
This was referenced Mar 12, 2021
Closed
Merged
Merged
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
fixes scala/bug#12332 on 2.13.x (2.12.x PR is #9488)
as with the 9.0 upgrade, I don't want to wait for the next 2.12.x -> 2.13.x merge to get this tested, especially now that 2.13.5 is approaching even faster than we thought