rescript-lang / rescript-lang/rescript
Spreading an object affects interpretation of its optional fields
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- OCaml
- Stars
- 7.5k
- Forks
- 485
- Avg merge
- 1d 2h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 55
Description
It appears spreading an object affects how its optional fields are being interpreted compared to not spreading the object. Not sure if this is intentional but it really feels like a bug.
See playground here
This happens in latest 13 alpha too
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 with the linked ReScript playground and compare the optional-field interpretation for the spread and non-spread versions shown there. Determine whether the difference is intentional, then establish the expected behavior and verify the same case against the latest version, including regression coverage if the issue is confirmed.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- javascript, ocaml
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100