Markus Schirp

@tjchambers No not a philosophical question. An axium applyment question. to me "gredyness is more powerful than non greedyness".

> I think so. I does require more syntax to enable non-greedy matching. I think we should focus on the semantics, not the syntax to apply the axiom?

@dkubb OT: IMO focusing on minimizing semantics (not terminal syntax) is also what we do successfully to determine the availability of ruby mutations. There are some mutations that encode less...

@dgollahon Noops should be run next to their siblings to increase the chance isolation issues on concurrency can be found. But a failed noop needs to make pending evils on...

@nepalez Can you get me a small / repo-gist with reproduction? I'm curious which specific scenario you ran into. I personally do not use refinements for various reasons, so mutant...

As I think refinements are an antifeature, and my OSS policy is to only support my own needs (while still opensourcing so others can benefit), I'm _close_ to consider this...

From that feedback I think we should simply should ignore "refinement infection", and skip over these subjects when matching. Mutant could warn with something like: ``` Cannot emit subject for...

> It would be nice Feel free to PR support with good mutation covering specs and I'll merge it. And or pay me to implement/maintain it. I literally cannot make...

I like the idea, but I do not have a need to do it for my projects. So tagging as not-on-authors-free-time to encourage funding or (preferred) outside contribution.

> Actually this PR Its an issue, did I miss a PR? > I've found functional approach (transproc etc.) far more clean. Ack. But still I got funding for some...