Skip to content

Conversation

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes #3745.

Since this change doesn't mention variability, I don't see that it would interfere with #3610.

Copy link
Collaborator

@HansOlsson HansOlsson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems ok.

@HansOlsson
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes #3745.

Since this change doesn't mention variability, I don't see that it would interfere with #3610.

It doesn't interfere with #3610 - but it builds on it and should thus be merged later, as the reason the function having this annotation cannot be called in some places is the variability defined in that PR.

So, let's get #3610 merged

@henrikt-ma
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This PR is obsolete since the merge of #3762. Closing.

@henrikt-ma henrikt-ma closed this Nov 28, 2025
@henrikt-ma henrikt-ma deleted the generateevents-event-generation branch November 28, 2025 12:24
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.

Should GenerateEvents = true be treated like event-generating?

2 participants