-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 121
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
Implement local type inference for let
statements
#198
Conversation
2da1062
to
f26dd83
Compare
f26dd83
to
07cdc25
Compare
Let's fix the merge conflict in CHANGELOG and move the tests to their new location |
713da44
to
dd61f96
Compare
@anton-trunov done |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Look good! Let's add some more tests (see my comment below) and there is one concern with AST cloning
There is a case when local type inference should break: |
@anton-trunov everything's done! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let's go!
In Roadmap.md there was a line "let". The mistake is that the first letter in the sentence should be capitalized. I suggest fixing this problem by writing "Let" instead of "let". Original: "let-statements can now be used without an explicit type declaration and determine the type automatically if it was not specified: PR tact-lang#198 and PR tact-lang#438" Improved: "Let-statements can now be used without an explicit type declaration and determine the type automatically if it was not specified: PR tact-lang#198 and PR tact-lang#438" Closes tact-lang#591 - [ ] I have updated CHANGELOG.md - [ ] I have documented my contribution in Tact Docs: https://github.com/tact-lang/tact-docs/pull/PR-NUMBER - [ ] I have added tests to demonstrate the contribution is correctly implemented: this usually includes both positive and negative tests, showing the happy path(s) and featuring intentionally broken cases - [ ] I have run all the tests locally and no test failure was reported - [ ] I have run the linter, formatter and spellchecker - [ ] I did not do unrelated and/or undiscussed refactorings
resolves #161