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

enable strict_types in generator #481

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 2, 2024

Conversation

shish
Copy link
Collaborator

@shish shish commented Dec 2, 2024

(Continuing with pulling the changes from shish/safe into tcm/safe in small hopefully easy-to-review chunks)

@shish shish force-pushed the strict_types branch 4 times, most recently from 4426e97 to 724e515 Compare December 2, 2024 15:04
@staabm
Copy link
Collaborator

staabm commented Dec 2, 2024

awesome, thanks for all this.

fyi, I would wait before merging new PRs, until the generator is fixed to get the code generator working before we proceed
(but you can of course send more new PRs)

@shish
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shish commented Dec 2, 2024

The generator is already working in my branch - these PRs are me trying to get us in-sync one small step at a time :)

@staabm
Copy link
Collaborator

staabm commented Dec 2, 2024

The generator is already working in my branch - these PRs are me trying to get us in-sync one small step at a time :)

I see. do you think its possible to work on PRs which get the generator running first?

@shish
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shish commented Dec 2, 2024

Technically anything is possible with enough effort - but those changes are built on top of these ones, and I worry that trying to re-order the commits would cause more merge-conflicts with more potential to mess things up ^^;;

@staabm
Copy link
Collaborator

staabm commented Dec 2, 2024

I see. please leave a hint in the PRs so we can be sure they get merged in the correct order. thank you for your effort

@shish
Copy link
Collaborator Author

shish commented Dec 2, 2024

I'm sending them in dependency-based batches, so these self-contained foundations are safe to merge in parallel, in any order - then once the divergence between shish/safe and tcm/safe is as small as possible, we can focus more closely on the more significant behaviour-change diffs :3

(Continuing with pulling the changes from shish/safe into tcm/safe in small hopefully easy-to-review chunks)
@staabm staabm merged commit b35aab3 into thecodingmachine:master Dec 2, 2024
7 of 12 checks passed
@staabm
Copy link
Collaborator

staabm commented Dec 2, 2024

thanks

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.

2 participants