docs: RFC recommending against a write/rename engine (closes #242)#249
Merged
Conversation
|
You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the Codex usage dashboard. |
…e (issue #242) Analyzed whether CodeLens should build an actual rename/move execution engine to eliminate drift between the graph used for analysis (trace/ impact) and a hypothetical graph used to execute writes. Conclusion: don't build it. Issue #241 (merged) already delivers the real value — a rename checklist computed from the same graph trace/impact already use, with an explicit caveat about what static analysis can't see (dynamic imports, string-keyed dispatch, cross-language string-literal references like Tauri IPC command names). A full write engine would mean re-implementing what language servers already do correctly via LSP rename providers — CodeLens already has partial LSP integration (--deep, hybrid_engine.py) that's the right foundation IF this is ever revisited, not a bespoke AST rewriter built from scratch. The graph-drift concern this RFC was meant to address is lower-stakes than framed: every refactor tool (including LSP-based ones) faces "analysis computed at time T can be stale by time T+1 of execution" — the mitigation is re-verify close to execution (which issue #237's staleness signal, merged, already provides), not sharing one graph object across analysis and a write engine that doesn't exist and shouldn't.
|
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
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Closes #242.
Summary
RFC evaluating whether CodeLens should build an actual rename/move execution engine. Conclusion: no — recommend the issue close with this document as the record.
Key points:
trace/impactuse, with an explicit caveat about what's not covered.--deep/hybrid_engine.pyLSP integration is the right foundation if this is ever revisited, not a bespoke AST rewriter.No code changes — this is RFC-only per the issue's own scope constraint ("RFC boleh berakhir dengan rekomendasi 'tidak lanjut', itu outcome yang valid").