Hi,

Over the last few months I've been trying to port typed.spec to spec1 (right now it's written for spec2). The main thing that's missing in spec1 is the concept of a "symbolic spec"--effectively I need to carve out a subset of spec1 that can be treated as symbolic.

This is weirder than I expected, especially around singleton specs (set literals). For example, does #{a} stand for #{'a} or #{@'#a}? I still don't fully understand the answer, and it's quite important to typed.spec since it uses singleton specs often to instantiate type variables.

Last month I successfully wrote a compatibility layer for typed.spec that allows switching between spec1 and spec2, so I think most of the work is done. But perhaps more thinking is required to really get it working. At the moment, my feeling is that spec1 support will always be a second-class citizen due to its lack of symbolic specs, but not by much.

Ambrose