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

Enforce specific implicit #56

Open
MatthewHambley opened this issue Apr 26, 2022 · 0 comments
Open

Enforce specific implicit #56

MatthewHambley opened this issue Apr 26, 2022 · 0 comments
Labels
discussion This issue needs further discussion enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@MatthewHambley
Copy link
Collaborator

The MissingImplicit rule checks for the absence of an implicit statement and is mollified by finding one. It might be desirable to provide an option to require a specific implication. I would expect this to normally be none but there's no need to rule out the other options.

@MatthewHambley MatthewHambley added enhancement New feature or request discussion This issue needs further discussion labels Apr 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion This issue needs further discussion enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant