Initial refactor feat. Claude, commit to mark state #318
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Tracking progression of edits with Claude.
This branch was initially an experiment in adding typed Racket annotations to more of Forge's core files. This was going OK until we realized that the way the AST was structured made using static types difficult: it wasn't always clear what the type of child nodes was, because
node/expr/opcontained thechildrenfield, and a relational expression might have children that are formulas, expressions, or integer expressions. So this commit is a Claude-driven refactor. Tests pass, but still needs my review and to actually return to the static types.I am pushing this and making it an explicit PR so I can track it, try Copilot review on it, etc.