Open
Description
#!stacks
"crash/crash" &&
("go/types.(*Named).resolve:+0" || "go/types.(*Named).Underlying:+0") &&
"go/types.(*Named).under:+1" &&
"go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+7" &&
"go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29"
Issue created by stacks.
Looks like Alignof was applied to a named struct type (illegally) containing itself as its first field.
This stack gYYnog
was reported by telemetry:
crash/crash
go/types.(*Named).resolve:+0
go/types.(*Named).Underlying:+2
go/types.(*Named).under:+1
go/types.under:+2
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+7
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
golang.org/x/tools/gopls@v0.17.1 go1.23.3 windows/amd64 vscode (1)
Dups: 2Xy8hA
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
Type
Projects
Milestone
Relationships
Development
No branches or pull requests
Activity
adonovan commentedon Jan 6, 2025
Hmm, the underlying type of the struct literal in
type S struct { S }
is invalid type, so the real question is how did the self-containing struct type get constructed?gabyhelp commentedon Jan 6, 2025
Related Issues
(Emoji vote if this was helpful or unhelpful; more detailed feedback welcome in this discussion.)
adonovan commentedon Feb 25, 2025
This stack
2Xy8hA
was reported by telemetry:crash/crash
go/types.(*Named).Underlying:+0
go/types.(*Named).under:+1
go/types.under:+2
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+7
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29
go/types.(*gcSizes).Alignof:+29