Radek Szymczyszyn

Hi, @Fl4m3Ph03n1x! Thanks for raising this. Could you also share the definition of `Structs.string_map_to_struct/2` (or the entire `Shared.Utils.Structs` module for simplicity's sake)? Are you running the analysis on source files...

I've looked at it a bit more, but it's not clear to me yet where the error comes from. It's certain the type is defined and the error message doesn't...

Thanks for the review, @elbrujohalcon, and for pushing the formatter initiative forward!

I would try to reuse as much code as possible with the current Mix task (which, in turn, mimics the `gradualizer` CLI). This means we mostly need a way to...

Thanks, @Fl4m3Ph03n1x! This is an interesting example of a false negative :+1: Marking it as a bug.

> It should complain that the specification for the return type is incorrect. Or that the returned value is of a wrong type if we assume that specs are the...

@Fl4m3Ph03n1x thanks for the report :+1: This needs research on our side, but one thing I have in mind is that we're aware of some regressions which happened when exhaustiveness...

Thanks for the report, @eksperimental :+1: Both of these need some research on our side.

@simonprev Indeed, your diagnosis is correct. Thanks for looking into it :+1: > I thought that the pattern match would "define" a typing like in TypeScript. I think that's a...

Hi @cschmatzler! The `arguments of type binary() and binary()` part looks really puzzling, indeed. It seems to be an upstream (Gradualizer) bug, but we'll have to dig into it to...