-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.7k
[Records] Analyzer implementation #49714
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
@srawlins what items are needed to call this feature work done? |
@scheglov @bwilkerson would you like to itemize the work? I could also go through the commit history and make a checkbox list. |
I updated it by copying |
@bwilkerson have you found that these items cover most necessary work? Is there anything in that list I should update? |
@scheglov can confirm, but I believe that the list above is reasonably complete and that the analyzer, aside from a couple of known bugs, is complete. |
Yes, I think the analyzer implementation is probably complete. However there are still discussions about parsing ambiguous code, and corresponding parser changes, and there is a bucket of co19 tests failing because of the need to disambiguate. So, there might be something new to be uncovered with tests. |
@bwilkerson and @scheglov thank you for providing clarity around this issue! |
@scheglov how about now? Did the change regarding whitespace in an annotation land? And the change to make the first value in a record, |
I believe we can mark "records" done. |
The following is a list of the individual features that need to be considered. The features are listed roughly in dependency order.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: