Daniel Sainati

Just omitting the value seems suspect to me; it gives no information about what was originally present on that field. Can we instead emit some kind of dummy value that...

That or some text saying "Function Value Omitted", for example

Nice. We should also update the json spec as well.

> I am not sure of benefit vs cost here, considering what we allow is very limited. Are you saying you don't think this is worth doing?

> for example if you make an extension, then later some time composite adds a method named ‘foo’ , extension is broken (even extension owner didn’t change anything) This is...

> I think most powerful usage of extensions will be to extend the native functionality ( by hooking some functions ) So somehow extension should be able to override the...

Method overloading/overriding, and dynamic dispatch in general, is something Cadence explicitly did not include in the language for security reasons (see https://developers.flow.com/cadence#security); it is important that when a developer calls...

Thanks for the comments on the FLIP so far; I have updated the FLIP in response to some of the open questions. In particular: > Dependencies between extensions and removal...

Another question that has come up: at the moment this FLIP requires extensions to have the same kind as the type they extend; i.e. all extensions of a resource are...

> the biggest addition being that extensions can directly reference the resource they are extending Perhaps I am misunderstanding, but I believe the proposal already allows for this: an extension...