Scala Buggabot

Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-10152?orig=1 Reporter: @Atry Affected Versions: 2.12.1 See #8685

@som-snytt said: The linked issue is also about synthetics getting the annotation. Explicit def is not allowed: ```scala scala> @deprecated("nope","forever") def C(i: Int) = new C(i) ; implicit class C(i:...

Imported From: https://issues.scala-lang.org/browse/SI-6524?orig=1 Reporter: @Sciss

@hubertp said: Duplicate of #4425 and #3353.

@Sciss said: I don't see this as a duplicate; those are bugs which deal with default arguments for implicit parameters *in the unapply method*; i.e. with arguments *supplied to* the...

@hubertp said (edited on Oct 15, 2012 5:24:18 PM UTC): Well, from the title of the bug that looks like 'named and default arguments'. And fixing those bugs means defining...

@Sciss said (edited on Oct 15, 2012 5:38:14 PM UTC): Of course it is loosely related, because this issue (which is not a bug but a feature request!) and the...

@hubertp said: The first example has nothing to do with it, agreed. Still, the interaction between named and default arguments in pattern matching which is decided here will influence how...

@Sciss said: For reference, here is the [scala-debate thread](https://scala-debate.narkive.com/zoSCrgaj/default-and-named-arguments-in-extractors). There are some valid points against this, particularly when custom extractors are used, there is no defined naming for the "arguments"...

Shelby Moore III (shelby) said: My thought is to prefer: ``` 1. case Advance(time, isSeek) 2. case Advance(time, isSeek = false) 3. case Advance(t = time, isSeek = false) ```...