consistency review for trace scopes
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
postponed
- Dominant language
- Lean
- Stars
- 9.2k
- Forks
- 990
- Avg merge
- 1d 17h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 175
Description
Currently there are several different conventions for the naming of trace scopes (which appear as options that a user can set using set_option), making discoverability hard.
We should review, come up with a standard, and then make everything consistent.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by locating the trace scope names and their set_option uses across the repository. Review the existing naming conventions, propose a standard, and confirm that all trace scopes follow it; the issue does not name specific files or tests.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100