Put effects in biblio #426
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| if (entry.type === 'op' && entry.effects?.length > 0) { | ||
| this._effectfulAOs.set(entry.aoid, entry.effects); | ||
| for (const effect of entry.effects) { | ||
| if (!this._effectWorklist.has(effect)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We really need a MultiMap...
michaelficarra
approved these changes
Mar 28, 2022
bakkot
force-pushed
the
effects-in-biblio
branch
from
8bfb0ea to
3fe9162
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Based on #425.
This makes the effects (right now, just "user code") be present in the exported biblio, for the benefit of other tooling and so that proposals can get the [UC] annotation.
However, because this requires additional work on behalf of consumers for the rendering to be accurate (namely, explicitly marking any roots of user code in their own text), this PR also makes the rendering opt-in. This is therefore a breaking change (because 262 will need to opt in to get its current behavior).