Withdraw RFC 53: Compile-Time Expressions#227
Merged
Conversation
RFC 53 was accepted in 2018 and never implemented. The text leaves several core questions about the feature open. We would happily accept a fuller proposal accompanied by a working implementation.
ponylang-main
added
status - new
jemc
approved these changes
May 6, 2026
jemc
added
the
status - final comment period
Member
Author
|
Approved. |
This was referenced May 13, 2026
ponylang-main
removed
the
discuss during sync
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
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
RFC 53 was accepted in 2018 and never implemented. Reading it now, it leaves several core questions about the feature open: capability semantics, behavior of
errorinside compile-time expressions, floating point host/target semantics, and which subset of the language is actually permitted. These are not edge cases. They define what the feature does.The idea is worth pursuing. A future RFC on this topic should pin these questions down and come with a working implementation that can be evaluated alongside the design.
If accepted, the follow-on actions are to add a withdrawal note to the top of
text/0053-compile-time-expression.mdand close ponyc#2591 with a pointer back to this RFC.