Reintroduce questionmark placeholder #2757
Closed
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Based on #2756, related to scala/scala#9990
Once 2.12.16 and 2.13.9 are released and available, this should be merged and released.
The presumption is that scalac will support both
_and?syntax for some time, and thus scalameta should only start using the new syntax once it's possible to update.Currently anything that attempts to use these dialects to generate code for either of these dialects will fail (metals, codegen tools that use scalameta's
.syntaxdirectly (eg guardrail-dev/guardrail#1483))