Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Revert changes in #2764 after Stable Cadence #2766

Closed
Tracked by #2642
, #3595
...
dsainati1 opened this issue Sep 6, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3614
Closed
Tracked by #2642
, #3595
...

Revert changes in #2764 after Stable Cadence #2766

dsainati1 opened this issue Sep 6, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3614
Labels
Feedback Technical Debt

Comments

@dsainati1
Copy link
Contributor

Issue to be solved

#2764 improves the Stable Cadence migration path, but introduces an unfortunate parser ambiguity in the process. We should revert this change after Stable Cadence has been release for a sufficient time period.

Suggested Solution

No response
@dsainati1 dsainati1 self-assigned this Sep 6, 2023
@turbolent
Copy link
Member

Please also add this to #2642

@dsainati1 dsainati1 mentioned this issue Sep 7, 2023
Open
@j1010001 j1010001 mentioned this issue Sep 27, 2024
Open
@j1010001 j1010001 removed the Feature label Oct 7, 2024
@turbolent
Copy link
Member

Decision: Don't remove, leave for developers trying pre-1.0 code.

TODO: Remove TODO and explain why code exists

@SupunS SupunS mentioned this issue Oct 16, 2024
Merged
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Feedback Technical Debt
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Explain the reason for support parsing legacy restricted types onflow/cadence
4 participants
@turbolent @dsainati1 @SupunS @j1010001