Yan Chen

> If I have an actual vec nat8 (for say, a list of spaces in a parking lot). It is possible that I want to upgrade to vec nat16 (added...

You are right that `ComplexFunc` is boxed because it's recursive. OTOH, Rust doesn't require this, because it's using an opaque `Func` type. Depending on how we resolve #273, we may...

An alternative is to make the future type self-describing: the future value contains the a small type table itself. Then we don't need to change the spec.

We don't need to declare that in the spec. It's defined in the specific future opcode. We only include a type table if the opcode is a type constructor. For...

> It's unintuitive. Yes, we would love to hear a better alternative. > It seems hard to do exhaustively and would be easy to accidentally miss a field, especially with...

There's a rudimentary debug info here: https://github.com/dfinity/candid/blob/master/rust/candid/src/de.rs#L127. It is in the error structure, but not displayed at the moment. I can recover that before we have a better debug message.

Yes, we are improving the error message as we add subtyping check in deserialization. For @bitdivine's case, it seems `dfx` is not getting the did file. Is governance.did specified in...

Sure, feel free to make a PR here.

> pretty-print a report that summarizes ("usefully") how the two values differ FYI I recently tried the `pretty` crate and find it very nice. See this PR: https://github.com/dfinity/candid/pull/56

The candid type is generated at runtime via `T::ty()`, so at the proc macro phase, the compiler doesn't know anything about candid type. That's why we need to compile to...