You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to users@buildr.apache.org by Lincoln Hochberg <li...@hotpotato.com> on 2010/03/16 20:47:09 UTC

quick compilation question

Hi all, I'm evaluating buildr and sbt.  Sbt compilation works ok, but in the
buildr compile I get a lot of these errors:

error: illegal inheritance;
 self-type com.hotpotato.api.ops.AcceptFriendRequests.type does not conform
to com.hotpotato.util.actors.Notifier's selftype
com.hotpotato.util.actors.Notifier

This seems to happen whenever I chain together multiple traits via: extends
T1 with T2 with T3.

I did do some searching of the list archives but couldn't find anything.

Any thoughts?  I'm sure I'm missing something basic...


Thanks,
Lincoln

Re: quick compilation question

Posted by Alex Boisvert <al...@gmail.com>.
Are you sure you're compiling the same sources with both?

If they are the same source, then the likely difference is which version of
Scala is used in SBT/Buildr.

In Buildr, the easiest is to check your SCALA_HOME (if set) or add the
following to your buildfile:

p "Scala version #{Buildr::Scala.version}"

Another wild guess is that I have seen the Scala compiler report bogus
errors like this if you don't have all your classpath dependencies set
correctly.  So that would be another area to check... make sure all your
jars / artifacts are properly set up for the compile task.

alex


On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Lincoln Hochberg <li...@hotpotato.com>wrote:

> Hi all, I'm evaluating buildr and sbt.  Sbt compilation works ok, but in
> the
> buildr compile I get a lot of these errors:
>
> error: illegal inheritance;
>  self-type com.hotpotato.api.ops.AcceptFriendRequests.type does not conform
> to com.hotpotato.util.actors.Notifier's selftype
> com.hotpotato.util.actors.Notifier
>
> This seems to happen whenever I chain together multiple traits via: extends
> T1 with T2 with T3.
>
> I did do some searching of the list archives but couldn't find anything.
>
> Any thoughts?  I'm sure I'm missing something basic...
>
>
> Thanks,
> Lincoln
>