Remove the double contract application introduced in #1194 #1625
Conversation
This file contains 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
Because of #1228 we syntactically forbid contracts from containing free type variables. This was implemented in #1271 and #1272. As a result, the double contract application in #1194 became dead code. This PR removes the `%dualize%` primop, the `dualize` field in `Label` and the double application logic when constructing recursive environments for records.
yannham
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Because of #1228 we syntactically forbid contracts from containing free type variables. This was implemented in #1271 and #1272. As a result, the double contract application in #1194 became dead code. This PR removes the
%dualize%primop, thedualizefield inLabeland the double application logic when constructing recursive environments for records.