Skip to content

Conversation

ejgallego
Copy link
Member

Serialization should be specific to each particular backend, so we let
the Stm clients choose how the send the nodes.

This should be quite safe to pull in. Test suite passes.

Related to #180

@gares
Copy link
Member

gares commented May 31, 2016

Fine with the idea, but I dislike Inl/Inr (in general, it's like monads, it irritates my skin) and here I guess an option type is just fine.

I'll merge it this afternoon.

@ejgallego
Copy link
Member Author

Cool, thanks Enrico! Give me 10 minutes to push a fix for your comments.

@ejgallego ejgallego force-pushed the stm-remove-serialization branch from e3e2926 to 0dd58bd Compare May 31, 2016 12:24
Serialization should be specific to each particular backend, so we let
the Stm clients choose how the send the nodes.

This should be quite safe to pull in. Test suite passes.

Related to rocq-prover#180
@ejgallego ejgallego force-pushed the stm-remove-serialization branch from 0dd58bd to 03f6c8b Compare May 31, 2016 12:40
@ejgallego
Copy link
Member Author

Ok @gares , this is ready to merge now IMO.

@ejgallego
Copy link
Member Author

Integrated in #180

@ejgallego ejgallego closed this Jun 1, 2016
@ejgallego ejgallego deleted the stm-remove-serialization branch June 2, 2016 16:56
jfehrle pushed a commit to jfehrle/coq that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2022
181: Adapt to Coq's PR rocq-prover#9909 r=ppedrot a=maximedenes

To be merged only once rocq-prover#9909 is.

Co-authored-by: Maxime Dénès <maxime.denes@inria.fr>
proux01 pushed a commit to proux01/rocq that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2024
Add Ali Caglayan to the maintainers team
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants