You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We want to use enums in fact keys, and there shouldn't be any reason why you can't do that, except enum values are internally string pairs instead of integers (IIRC this was done to ease interface generation).
I think it would make more sense to indirect enums through a definition stored in the machine. The actual value stores a type name and an index into that definition. That index will be naturally orderable, then it can be used in fact keys.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We want to use enums in fact keys, and there shouldn't be any reason why you can't do that, except enum values are internally string pairs instead of integers (IIRC this was done to ease interface generation).
I think it would make more sense to indirect enums through a definition stored in the machine. The actual value stores a type name and an index into that definition. That index will be naturally orderable, then it can be used in fact keys.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: