Repository navigation
Bound recursive array and tuple type printing - #64694
Draft
Ryan Cavanaugh (RyanCavanaugh) with Copilot wants to merge 2 commits into
Draft
Ryan Cavanaugh (RyanCavanaugh) with Copilot wants to merge 2 commits into
Ryan Cavanaugh (RyanCavanaugh) with Copilot wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Co-authored-by: RyanCavanaugh <6685088+RyanCavanaugh@users.noreply.github.com>
Copilot
AI
changed the title
[WIP] Fix type printer recursion issue with nested array/tuple types
Bound recursive array and tuple type printing
Oct 8, 2026
This branch has not been deployed
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Recursive generic types can produce a fresh array or tuple at every level, evading the type printer’s exact-cycle check. Printing them can overflow the stack or affect later type checking.
noErrorTruncationdiagnostics, declaration emit, and a subsequent diagnostic.any) #64683