Hacktoberfest 2026：維護者為十月標記出來的 issue，仍然開放、適合新手。 瀏覽 Hacktoberfest issue

Untagged variants: no warning for patterns shadowed by a literal case, and a spurious non-exhaustive warning for bool payloads

已關閉
  • 哪裡不對？
#8,806 0 則留言 0 個 reaction 已指派 0 人 在 GitHub 檢視

維護者通常 1 天內回覆

@cknitt 已經在處理了。

開始於 2026年10月19日。

  • #8914 來自 @cknitt —— 未關閉

評估

難度
5/5
預估耗時
一週以上
新手友好度
35/100
Issue 類型
缺陷
描述清晰度
描述清楚
活躍度
活躍
技術堆疊
ocaml
領域
compilers

研究方向

Start by reading parmatch.ml, which the issue identifies as the site of the exhaustiveness check, and find the adjacent unused-case check for the warning proposal. Review the related issues #8631, #8632, and #8777 for runtime value comparisons and overlap cases. Done means dead untagged payload patterns are warned about and the bool example is exhaustive without an unreachable failure.

由索引模型根據 Issue 內容生成。

描述

Summary

An untagged variant may have a literal case whose runtime value a payload case can also hold (#8632, #8777):

@unboxed type t = | @as("a") A | S(string)

Matching tests declared literals first, so the pattern S("a") can never match. The value "a" always goes to A, or to a wildcard if there is no A arm. The type checker treats S("a") and A as different, which causes two problems.

1. No warning for patterns that can never match

Checked on master. None of these produce a warning, and each S(...) arm marked dead is dead in the generated JS:

let f1 = x => switch x { | A => 1 | S("a") => 2 | S(_) => 3 }  // S("a") dead
let f2 = x => switch x { | S("a") => 2 | A => 1 | S(_) => 3 }  // dead even as first arm
let f3 = x => switch x { | S("a") => 2 | _ => 3 }              // compiles to `return 3`
let f4 = x => switch x { | S("a" | "b") => 2 | _ => 3 }        // the "a" alternative is dead

The same applies when:

  • the literal comes from the constructor name (Primary | Color(string): Color("Primary") is dead);
  • an int literal overlaps a float payload (@as(1) One | F(float): F(1.0) is dead);
  • a nested untagged constant has the same value (@as("x") X | W(inner) where inner has @as("x") P: W(P) is dead).

In a refutable binding such as let l = (S("a") as v) => v, the pattern never matches at all, so every call with S("a") throws Match_failure.

Proposal: warn on a constructor pattern S(p) of an untagged variant when every value p can match is the runtime value of a literal case in the same variant. Use warning 11 (unused case) for a whole arm and warning 12 (redundant sub-pattern) for or-pattern alternatives. Suggested message: "this pattern can never match: "a" is the value of constructor A".

Notes:

  • The check is local to each pattern and doesn't depend on arm order, so it can run beside check_unused without touching the exhaustiveness algorithm.
  • Values must be compared the way they are at runtime, as in #8631: 1 and 1.0 are equal, bigint spellings differ (1_0n = 10n), ints use their 32-bit value, and a constructor without @as is represented by its own name.
  • Guards (S(s) if s == "a") are out of scope.

2. Spurious non-exhaustive warning for bool payloads

With #8777 a bool payload can partly overlap a literal:

@unboxed type b = | @as(true) Yes | Ans(bool)
let g = x => switch x { | Yes => 1 | Ans(false) => 2 }

This match covers every value, yet the compiler reports warning 8 with the counterexample Ans(true) and emits an unreachable Match_failure throw. The only way to silence it is to add the dead arm Ans(true) => ..., which point 1 would then flag. The two parts therefore need to land together, or the bool case ends up with no warning-free way to write the match.

Proposal: during the exhaustiveness check only, treat a literal-case pattern as also covering the payload values equal to it, e.g. check Yes as Yes | Ans(true). This is harder than point 1 because it changes parmatch.ml. For string and number payloads it rarely matters, since their domain is infinite, but for bool it does.

Related: #8632, #8777, #8631, rescript-lang/rescript-lang.org#1337

主要語言
OCaml
星號
7.5k
分支
483
平均合併
20 小時 7 分鐘
30 天內合併 PR
227

環境準備

在 Codespaces 中開啟

在瀏覽器裡用你自己的 GitHub 帳號啟動這個專案的開發容器。

從這裡開始

  1. 先讀完整個 Issue，再讀專案的貢獻指南。
  2. 在 Issue 下留言說明你要接手 —— 這能避免兩個人做同樣的事。
  3. Fork 儲存庫，在一個分支上完成修改。
  4. 送出 Pull Request，並在描述裡引用這個 Issue 編號。

rescript-lang/rescript 的其他 Issue

查看 rescript-lang/rescript 的全部 Issue

相似的 Issue

更多 Compilers Issue

把新 issue 寄到你的電子郵件信箱

精選適合新手參與的 GitHub issue 摘要。