Conversation
lionel-
added this pull request to stack #1412
September 18, 2026 17:36
lionel-
force-pushed
the
oak-query/cross-file-cycle
branch
from
September 20, 2026 09:27
be7d0f8 to
fd9ccb0
Compare
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Part of #1409
A review pass based on the query guardrails found a cycle through cross-file symbol resolution. In practice it's hard to reach this cycle because it usually occurs via
semantic_index(), but it's possible to reliably trigger it with tests, so this should be fixed defensively.This PR adds a cycle handler for
cross_file_layers()that skips attaches in predecessors. It preserves visible files, namespace imports, loader-provided attaches, and the search-path tail. The cycle is linted via the existingSourceCyclewarning.Positron Release Notes
New Features
Bug Fixes