Should multiple-value static infos live under a key?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Racket
- Stars
- 601
- Forks
- 74
- Avg merge
- 2d 10h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 5
Description
Currently, multiple-value static infos live under #%values/statinfo_meta.values_key, but I think some aspects of them make them different than other genuine static info:
- Static infos of different arity are incompatible, and their combination renders the whole package invalid;
- Manipulation of static infos, such as union and intersection, must be aware of the arity;
#%valuescannot be combined with other keys in any meaningful way;- Lookup should simply fail when the static infos are for anything other than arity 1.
Does it make more sense to revise the representation of static infos to accomodate for multiple-value cases? The drawback is, of course, more verbose manipulation for the most common case of arity 1.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
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 named. Start by tracing the current #%values and statinfo_meta.values_key representation, then evaluate how arity affects compatibility, union, intersection, combination with other keys, and lookup; done would require a decided representation and agreed behavior for multiple-value static infos.
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
- 20/100