Skip to content
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

Correctly constrain parameter types based on annotations #1370

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

shonfeder
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #1177

This would also open the way to supporting inline type annotations, like

(x : int) + 1

However we discussed an alternative fix for #1177 that may be less invasive, so
I'll see if I can prep a PR for that tomorrow.

  • Tests added for any new code
  • Documentation added for any new functionality
  • Entries added to the respective CHANGELOG.md for any new functionality
  • Feature table on README.md updated for any listed functionality

@shonfeder shonfeder marked this pull request as draft February 14, 2024 21:30
@@ -108,6 +110,32 @@ export interface QuintApp extends WithId {
args: QuintEx[]
}

// Not an expression, but still carries the base expression data
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was mainly only moved up to be right after the other expression types.

@shonfeder shonfeder marked this pull request as ready for review February 15, 2024 00:51
Instead of flagging the entire declaration as erroneous, we only
indicate the problematic expression now.
@shonfeder shonfeder force-pushed the 1177/prioritize-annotation-resolution branch from e494b1d to e380b2a Compare February 15, 2024 16:23
@shonfeder
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closed in favor of #1371

@shonfeder shonfeder closed this Feb 16, 2024
@shonfeder shonfeder deleted the 1177/prioritize-annotation-resolution branch February 16, 2024 12:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Strange error location given type annotation
1 participant