Conversation
Deploying with
|
| Latest commit: |
288fcfc
|
| Status: | ✅ Deploy successful! |
| Preview URL: | https://4c5489b8.primer-app.pages.dev |
| Branch Preview URL: | https://brprice-saturated-constructo.primer-app.pages.dev |
0d082d1 to
dc4464e
Compare
ff63e5d to
93a1824
Compare
93a1824 to
c76a1de
Compare
d504a35 to
a2db976
Compare
a2db976 to
66974ca
Compare
| fst: "Pattern", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| body: { | ||
| tag: "NoBody", | ||
| contents: "PatternApp", | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [ | ||
| { | ||
| body: { | ||
| contents: { | ||
| fst: "PatternCon", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| baseName: "Succ", | ||
| qualifiedModule: ["Builtins"], | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| tag: "TextBody", | ||
| contents: { | ||
| fst: "PatternCon", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| baseName: "Succ", | ||
| qualifiedModule: ["Builtins"], | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [], | ||
| nodeId: "15P1B", | ||
| }, | ||
| tag: "TextBody", | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [ | ||
| { | ||
| body: { | ||
| contents: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@georgefst here and elsewhere I have manually hacked the example trees to remove mentions of PatternApp, but I have not carefully checked if they are sane. Is there a nice way to regenerate these?
(In fact, I think I've messed something up, as odd-even still shows a $ node in a pattern)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a nice way to regenerate these?
There is not, unfortunately. In fact I think at least one of them is not a legitimate tree that the backend would ever create. We only really care that we can render something, though it is of course nice if the trees mostly look like real programs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
(In fact, I think I've messed something up, as odd-even still shows a
$node in a pattern)
FTR, even still has a $ node in a pattern as it contains the code
contents: {
fst: "Pattern",
snd: {
body: { tag: "NoBody", contents: "App" },
childTrees: [...
This is (in @georgefst's sense) not a legitimate tree, but that is fine. I think I'll leave it as-is.
66974ca to
3b7f86e
Compare
| fst: "Pattern", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| body: { | ||
| tag: "NoBody", | ||
| contents: "PatternApp", | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [ | ||
| { | ||
| body: { | ||
| contents: { | ||
| fst: "PatternCon", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| baseName: "Succ", | ||
| qualifiedModule: ["Builtins"], | ||
| }, | ||
| }, | ||
| tag: "TextBody", | ||
| contents: { | ||
| fst: "PatternCon", | ||
| snd: { | ||
| baseName: "Succ", | ||
| qualifiedModule: ["Builtins"], | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [], | ||
| nodeId: "15P1B", | ||
| }, | ||
| tag: "TextBody", | ||
| }, | ||
| childTrees: [ | ||
| { | ||
| body: { | ||
| contents: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is there a nice way to regenerate these?
There is not, unfortunately. In fact I think at least one of them is not a legitimate tree that the backend would ever create. We only really care that we can render something, though it is of course nice if the trees mostly look like real programs.
| case "DeleteType": | ||
| return "Delete this type"; | ||
| case "MakeCon": | ||
| return "Use a value constructor"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While we will revisit these wordings at some point, I would prefer that we kept this one, since we no longer really "apply" constructors as such.
It actually seems odd (and apologies, I should have caught this while reviewing the backend change), that our remaining action is called MakeConSat. Since there's only one way to insert constructors now, this should really just be MakeCon.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree. I have opened hackworthltd/primer#994 for the backend change, and changed this wording back.
I have also tweaked the short actionName from V $ ? to V ? ?.
|
What's holding this PR up? I'd like to get it merged and deployed ASAP. |
|
This will need to be bumped again when hackworthltd/primer#994 merges. EDIT: done |
3b7f86e to
e4f8e2e
Compare
This mostly involves simply bumping the primer pin to a version which has saturated constructors. However there are some small changes for compatibility: we remove references to no-longer existing 'MakeCon' action and 'PatternApp' flavor, which used to be exposed in primer's OpenAPI, but no longer exist. Signed-off-by: Ben Price <ben@hackworthltd.com>
e4f8e2e to
3cfd939
Compare
|
Is anyone able to use the deployment for this branch? I'm unable to create sessions, and seeing CORS errors in the console, which in the past has always indicated that I've forgotten to set the "Deploy service" label. |
I see the same, and don't know the reason. |
|
It should work now — I deleted and recreated the container. I'm not sure why you all are having issues with this new PR deployment scheme, as it's always worked for me. I'll need to debug a bit, but for now, we have a workaround, which is me recreating the container as I've done here. |
This mostly involves simply bumping the primer pin to a version which
has saturated constructors. However there are some small changes for
compatibility: we remove references to no-longer existing 'MakeCon'
action and 'PatternApp' flavor, which used to be exposed in primer's
OpenAPI, but no longer exist.