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

[RFC007] Migration of the typechecker part II - focus on bytecode::ast::typecheck #2170

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

yannham
Copy link
Member

@yannham yannham commented Feb 14, 2025

Sorry about the name, it is not very inspired. This PR is a split of the behemoth of #2134 that has become unmanageable, leading to unexpected and mandatory changes to many parts of Nickel. The current PR only keeps the changes to bytecode::ast, and doesn't actually get rid of the old typechecker, but instead only modifies bytecode::ast::typecheck.

The changes that landed here comes from actually testing the new typechecker, making all the tests of nickel-lang-core pass. It also includes various helpers additions to the bytecode::ast module.

@yannham yannham force-pushed the rfc007/typechecking-part-2a branch 5 times, most recently from 9147d19 to 5ed246e Compare February 14, 2025 13:44
@yannham yannham marked this pull request as ready for review February 14, 2025 13:44
@yannham yannham requested a review from jneem February 14, 2025 13:44
@yannham yannham force-pushed the rfc007/typechecking-part-2a branch from 5ed246e to c3df626 Compare February 14, 2025 15:04
This commit is a backport of many fixes that were done as part of
testing the new typecheck module that operates on the new AST
representation. This commit doesn't yet switch the default typechecker
to the new one, which requires to deeply change the `Cache` structures
and the LSP as well, which are still operating on the old
representation.

It also includes a bunch of new helpers for some AST data structures.
@yannham yannham force-pushed the rfc007/typechecking-part-2a branch from c3df626 to 285b67a Compare February 14, 2025 15:48
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.

1 participant