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.

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

Deriver: first release #192

Closed
3 of 5 tasks
vch9 opened this issue Oct 11, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed
3 of 5 tasks

Deriver: first release #192

vch9 opened this issue Oct 11, 2021 · 6 comments

Comments

@vch9
Copy link
Contributor

vch9 commented Oct 11, 2021

I have opened several issues that I believe should be fixed before we release the deriver.

Feel free to add if I missed something :)

@vch9
Copy link
Contributor Author

vch9 commented Dec 10, 2021

I'd propose to not require #191 for the first release. I currently have the time to solve multiple issues in that list, but, unfortunately I don't think I can right now do #191. However, I think this should not be blocking for a first release, shrinkers are great yes, and we will derive them as well, but generators would be a great first feature.

What do you think @jmid @c-cube

@jmid
Copy link
Collaborator

jmid commented Dec 11, 2021

As I wrote elsewhere I think only #188 is required before a release (from my POV)

@vch9
Copy link
Contributor Author

vch9 commented Dec 13, 2021

As I wrote elsewhere I think only #188 is required before a release (from my POV)

Required yes maybe. It will work for QCheck2, but it's a bit unfortunate to restrict the deriver to the new version only I think

@maurobringolf
Copy link

Any updates on this? Is there something a new contributor could help with?

So far I am a happy user of qcheck (thanks!) and recently ran into #197 and would very much like to see this merged. I am not (yet) familiar with the codebase, but am willing to invest time and help move this forward.

@vch9
Copy link
Contributor Author

vch9 commented Jan 4, 2022

Any updates on this? Is there something a new contributor could help with?

So far I am a happy user of qcheck (thanks!) and recently ran into #197 and would very much like to see this merged. I am not (yet) familiar with the codebase, but am willing to invest time and help move this forward.

We should not be far away from a first release. There is two open merge request regarding the deriver:

  1. Remove n fuel when its not used #215: fix a minor bug
  2. Deriver: qcheck and qcheck2 #209: support qcheck and qcheck2

The first one should be closed pretty easily, once @jmid and I agree on the patch. The second one however contains a lot of boiler-plate code. Reviews/tests/inputs would be more than welcome to help the maintainers in a potential merge.

@jmid
Copy link
Collaborator

jmid commented Nov 7, 2022

Closing as we already had a first release of ppx_deriving_qcheck

@jmid jmid closed this as completed Nov 7, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants