Thoughts on replacing Proxy with VTA?

Open
#85 3 comments 2 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

@pete-murphy is already working on this.

Since Jan 6, 2024.

  • #86 by @pete-murphy — open

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
10/100
Issue type
Refactor
Clarity
Needs clarification
Activity status
Stale
Domain
backend

Research direction

The issue proposes replacing Proxy with Visible Type Application syntax but does not identify files, tests, or a concrete scope. Read the open pull request #86 and its discussion to see whether the change is already underway and what decision was made; the issue gives no definition of done.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Is there any interest in (or objection to) updating this library to use Visible Type Application syntax in place of Proxy?

Dominant language
PureScript
Stars
68
Forks
33
Avg merge
2d 23h
Merged PRs (30d)
1

Getting set up

  • No Dockerfile or Docker Compose file
  • Has a pull request template
  • No contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from purescript/purescript-record

All issues in purescript/purescript-record

Similar issues

More Backend & API Design issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.