Operators should be defined as modules
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 126
- Forks
- 6
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Instead of being a compiler builtin, our operators should be defined in a standard library .sus file
The naming scheme is still up in the air, but as an example:
module __add__ #(int MAX_A, int MAX_B) {
interface __add__ : int #(MAX: MAX_A) a, int #(MAX: MAX_B) b -> int #(MAX: MAX_A+MAX_B)
/* Implementation is a compiler built-in */
}
That way we also don't need to define the way these bounds evolve in the compiler itself, and thus the user can more easily see what's under the hood.
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
No files, tests, or entry points are identified in the issue. Start by locating the compiler's operator and builtin handling, then inspect how standard library .sus modules are loaded; done means operators are represented through a standard-library module while their implementations remain compiler built-ins and bound evolution is no longer hard-coded there.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100