Skip to content

Conversation

WojciechMazur
Copy link
Contributor

Backports #21291 to the 3.6.2.

PR submitted by the release tooling.
[skip ci]

Addressing #19175

The motivation for this has already been established, among other things:
- the corresponding type level operations already use `Tuple` as upper bound;
- the corresponding `NamedTuple` operations also do not make a distinction;
- these operations are no more unsafe than other operations already available
  on `Tuple`, such as `drop`

Note this should _not_ be a problem for binary compatibility,
as both `Tuple` and `NonEmptyTuple` are erased to `Product`s
(see `defn.specialErasure`).

[Cherry-picked 16becd7]
Base automatically changed from release-3.6.2-backport-21286 to release-3.6.2 November 18, 2024 16:11
@WojciechMazur
Copy link
Contributor Author

No regressions detected in the community build up to release-3.6.2-backport-21949.

Reference

@WojciechMazur WojciechMazur merged commit c78be25 into release-3.6.2 Nov 18, 2024
32 checks passed
@WojciechMazur WojciechMazur deleted the release-3.6.2-backport-21291 branch November 18, 2024 16:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants