Nate Foster
In the interest of tidying up the set of active issues on the P4 specification repository, I'm marking this as "stalled" and closing it. Of course, we can always re-open...
In the interest of tidying up the set of active issues on the P4 specification repository, I'm marking this as "stalled" and closing it. Of course, we can always re-open...
Ahh, I'd forgotten about @QinshiWang's old writeup. Thanks for reminding me. Indeed, if we make this change, we would certainly not be able to do modular type checking. Perhaps there...
We discussed this again at the April '22 meeting. @QinshiWang and @jnfoster will discuss and come back to the group with a proposal for going forward...
In the interest of tidying up the set of active issues on the P4 specification repository, I'm marking this as "stalled" and closing it. Of course, we can always re-open...
Example program from LDWG chat. ``` control C(inout G G); package P(C c); header h { bit f; } header g { bool b1; bool b2; bool b3; bit padding;...
* Let's refactor or split this pull request to eliminate structure initializers. * Regarding the comparison operations, we need to revise the spec to explain the rewriting that the compiler...
@MollyDream do we close this in favor of @jafingerhut's more fine-grained PRs?
Ok. @MollyDream do you want to update this over the weekend? If so, we can add it to the list for Monday.
Closing this in favor of @jafingerhut's PRs.